 Investigators from the Vancouver Police Department executed multiple search warrants yesterday as part of an ongoing investigation into the operations of the Drug User Liberation Front, or DULF, a Vancouver-based organization that is publicly admitted to trafficking controlled substances including heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. We understand the magnitude of the ongoing overdose crisis and the impact drug toxicity deaths have in communities throughout the province including here in Vancouver. While DULF's actions were intended to reduce the harms caused by the toxic illicit drug supply, we have always warned that anyone who violates the criminal code or the controlled drugs and substances act should expect to face enforcement and criminal charges. This group was knowingly illegally trafficking in drugs. As a result, we took action to stop it. In addition to searching DULF's office located at East Hastings in Columbia Street, investigators also executed search warrants at two East Vancouver homes linked to the investigation. Two adults were arrested and were subsequently released. Investigators are now working to conclude the investigation and will consider recommending criminal charges related to drug trafficking. The Vancouver Police Department has worked collaboratively with health and community partners for decades to support innovative approaches to drug policy. In 2003, the VPD supported the launch of INSIGHT, the first supervised injection site in North America. Then in 2006, we were the first Canadian police agency to stop routinely attending overdose calls in recognition that automatic police attendance could be a barrier to people calling 911 during a medical emergency. Further, the VPD was a leading advocate in the police community for prescribed safe supply to combat the harms associated with the toxic illicit drug supply. In recent years, we've been a leading advocate for decriminalization of drugs for personal consumption in British Columbia and we're proud to see that achieved in 2023. While we support progressive drug policy and believe harm reduction strategies do reduce the number of lives lost due to drug toxicity, we are steadfast in our insistent that all strategies deployed must be fully compliant with the law. Anyone who ignores the law or fails to obtain the required legal exemptions should expect to be the subject of enforcement action. Thank you and I'm happy to take your questions. Can you tell us, I would imagine you seized some amount of drugs at the Columbia and Hastings rotation. Can you tell us how much drugs and what kinds of drugs it seized? Yes sir, I can tell you qualitatively the kinds. I can tell you that their substances that we believe are heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine. Investigators worked late into the evening last night and they have seized numerous suspected drugs and they're actively working right now. I saw them this morning. They're back in the office actively analyzing weighing. So in terms of a quantitative specific amount, I don't have that information at this time. But that is definitely evidence that we're collecting today. I'm trying to get a sense of this group has been doing this for a while. I'm trying to get a sense of what would be a place for the action yesterday. Like why why didn't you guys act months ago or next week? What happened to make now the time that you went ahead? Very good question and on the flip side of your question I think I've also heard you know with police investigations sometimes people will say well aren't there higher priorities such as you know organized crime, violence, people trafficking, drugs such as fentanyl associated to illicit drug deaths. And we always try to strike a balance and it's really a question of prioritization and prioritizing what our enforcement efforts are. You know obviously there's competing investigations. With DULF we were obviously aware of them being a community-based organization and initially when we came to understand who they were a lot of their actions I would say were surrounding protest events such as International Overdose Awareness Day which is typically marked on August 31st each year. Or at milestone occasions such as you know tragically when we saw in 2021 and then 2022 record numbers of overdose deaths and there was typically protest events where we'd see the group and see some of the activities. But what I can say changed to answer your question was definitely through the course the investigation knowledge in terms of their activities not being you know two or three times a year but being essentially on a regular reoccurring basis and the the volume of drugs trafficked is or factors that we would consider in terms of taking enforcement action. Again they've been around for a while so how long have you been investigating or what happened to freedom that decides who the head is yesterday? I can say that the the beginning of the investigation was in early September of this year so about a month and a half ago the investigation was initiated and led us to enforcement yesterday. So inspector you mentioned regular ongoing occurrences and you know in the data on the side regular ongoing occurrences of drug trafficking happens all the time and has for decades even before decriminalized happen a lot of people in that community have told us that you know police essentially do this as well so it's going to wind up. And so I wouldn't say that what I would say is there's always a prioritization that occurs in in terms of multiple competing potential investigations and the fact that we don't immediately take enforcement action or that there's other investigations such as ones we've brought you this year in terms of you know illicit fentanyl labs where fentanyl is being manufactured produced high-level trafficking people trafficking on the order of like a hundred kilograms of hard drugs obviously those are higher priority investigations but the fact that we don't immediately take enforcement action doesn't by any means mean that we are you know turning a blind eye condoning or saying that we're not going to take enforcement action it's just a matter of prioritization. Is there a concern just obviously the operator sort of this you know they advertise themselves to sort of save supply is there a concern that this seizure could maybe force someone who might have had access to what you had seized now going into maybe the illicit or I'm not gonna say they're all illicit market but going into the market maybe getting something potentially more costly. Absolutely and that's definitely like an unintended consequence that we don't want to see that's not something we're ever trying to achieve we fully support safe supply it's something that we work with our partners whether in government or community-based organizations to achieve but it has to be legal and where we see groups you know well publicized we saw Mr. Jerry Martin early this year in May that was well publicized in local media set up a shop in the downtown east side with a with a tiny home and start trafficking drugs that he said were tested and were held out to be safe similarly you know we said at that time we will take enforcement action and within a day you know enforcement action occurred so we try to be entirely transparent with what our messaging is entirely clear and what people in the community can expect from us and consistent in terms of what our approach is if people are knowingly actively breaking the law if they're trafficking drugs they should expect enforcement what have been the level of engagement with Dolph how long have you been telling them this subject before you crack down on I mean I think it was I think it was something that you know even in local media reports and all the the media reports are out there I think it was quite clear you know people that have commented whether it's different levels of government have commented that their actions clearly appear to be illegal as well as you know there's media reports out there media engagements members of Dolph have done where they've even stated themselves they're abundantly clear that their actions are illegal so I don't think this was anything that was a you know an onus on the police to would to advise them that their actions were in conflict with the law I believe that you know people externally that looked at this or even members of the organization themselves understood that their actions were illegal there's been there's been engagement with Dolph it's certainly like we're happy to engage with people throughout our community whether they're you know government based people who use drugs organizations that represent people who use drugs so you know we are familiar with Dolph it's a group that's known to us it's part they were always approachable to anyone in our community but we will never condone people acting outside of the law we've worked collaboratively with groups whether it's to achieve decriminalization you know two decades ago to support insight being open there is a legal process to seek the legal exemptions to operate in any kind of innovative drug policy it's a section 56 under the control drugs and substances act that allows for exceptions to be made and that is the avenue that is the vehicle to bring about innovative drug policy and we've always been consistent in that message whether to Dolph or whether to any other group that we deal with that is the vehicle that has to be used and ultimately the strategies that we bring online have to conform with the law why is it necessary to make these two arrests ultimately with in in support of executing the search warrants to secure evidence and ultimately confirm essential elements of the offense like identity and so arrests are required to be made in that instance the two individuals the adults that were arrested were released there's no need we're not seeking their continued further detention and we're always mindful about you know our actions and and the impact it has on making an arrest how many hours were they detained um I would have to get back here on specifics but I can say the two adults that were arrested were released last night related specifically with the rest can you tell us who they were that were arrested about their attacks? I can't and it's not of unwillingness to be entirely transparent it's just a matter of privacy in any case until charges are formally laid by crown council we will not identify people that be arrested in investigation. Is it fair to say though that they were part of the executive of the group or were they just attacked in the union stage? I will say that they were associated to the organization you know and obviously you know if individuals that were arrested wish to self-identify themselves that's that's something that they're able to do but it's not something that we will proactively do. I'm just going to cut in here everybody before we go around the room for a second round of questions I think there are some reporters in the room who haven't had an opportunity to ask the first question and Brennan in the back you've been trying to ask the question Professor go ahead. We're going back a little ways. He said part of the investigation was money on how much they were distributed and how often how often and how much did that fund them? It's definitely part of the investigation so I can't comment on specifics but I can say it definitely the investigation quickly led us to believe that it wasn't a case of being you know two or three times a year isolated protest-based actions that this was you know a regularly occurring action so that obviously changed the the prioritization for us as an organization. Yeah with the evidence that you have now what kind of charges might be possible? We'd be looking typically at drug charges namely possession for the purpose of trafficking and then different substances so if you traffic in different substances each of those in and of themselves so you're trafficking possession for the purpose of trafficking cocaine is one charge if you had another substance it's another charge so charges in this in this realm. Are you preparing a charge package right now? It is something that investigators will look at it's ultimately up to their discretion on whether or not to to recommend charges to Crown Council but that will form the next part of our investigation. Yeah one intriguing part of this story is this particular organization was actually getting funded by the provincial government substantial amount of money we've seen the records a couple of hundred thousand dollars in here albeit they said the money wasn't going to buy the drugs but I'm just curious have you guys ever done a drug arrest like this on an organization that was an official contractor to the provincial health organization? I mean I couldn't comment specifically we've always had we've had investigations in the past where you know there's definitely been intersection with health providers even going back dating myself back when I was a younger officer in 2003 a lot of people might forget or probably young in the room that you know in 2003 before Insight was formally and legally open there was actually you know a push by several groups to open you know essentially illegal unsanctioned what now we refer to as overdose prevention sites and with that you know there was definitely enforcement action that was taken and those sites to varying degrees could involve different levels of government or different local agencies so I mean I think you know when you get to the space of drug policy there's always you know it is a place that you know is part enforcement and involves the police but also of course involves health partners community-based organizations so it's I wouldn't say this is a first I can't I can't speak to that I wasn't involved in our in our drug policy at that point it wasn't part of those discussions so I couldn't you know speculate on why that is the case and you know with any of these things whether it you know it was Insight you know back 20 years ago it wasn't a matter of it wasn't ideologically based it wasn't the police saying you know we support this type of programming or we do not our messaging then 20 years ago was essentially the same that you know we're supportive of innovation we were supportive of Insight but it has to be achieved in a legal and lawful manner and whether that's overdose prevention sites now fully supportive I think we have you know over a dozen overdose prevention sites in the city of Vancouver we're fully supportive of those sites but again we would say that you know these need to be legally brought online and in compliance with the law. So what do you say to the people now who are probably going to like the street drug scores a few overdose prevention sites that are around after it's a sale of two decades it took them this long to get it out? You know we encourage people to you know seek resources in the community we appreciate you know the scope you know the appalling magnitude of the overdose crisis you know the the fact that you know over 12 and a half thousand British Columbians have died since April 2016 when the overdose crisis was declared by then Dr. Perry Kendall who was our chief medical officer in the province and you know the scope of the the magnitude of the crisis is not lost on us we have absolute understanding of the effect it has on people throughout our city across the province and the resulting need on police government partners community-based organizations to innovate to look to do things differently to reduce deaths and so we're committed to having those conversations we're committing committed to innovating having uncomfortable conversations but ultimately with anything that's arrived at it has to conform with the law it has to be legal. Related to the province and the government I'm wondering if you could say whether anyone from the General's office or anyone else within the government was aware of this or it won't happen years before or after as well. I don't believe in terms of before and in terms of you know government involvement I can say that this investigation was an initiated investigation by the Vancouver Police Department this wasn't you know involving any other organization or level of government this was a VPD initiated investigation. Okay we've got time for one or two more questions. I actually went down to the site when it was opening and they showed me the safe. There was a staggering amount of drugs that they had and it saved me back. It begs the question how were they able to source hard drugs in those amounts and do you know anything about where they got those drugs from and will part of your investigation be trying to identify the criminal organizations that were capable and were able to bring in drugs in those amounts. Great question absolutely it's something that we'll look at in the investigation. I believe by comments of members of of Dolf themselves and in media engagements they have done they have specifically discussed the reality that they are sourcing the substances from the dark web is what has been reported and with for us you know we're quite transparent as an organization. There's three major public safety threats that I would argue occur in Vancouver and many communities across our province and that is the overdose crisis which is fueled by illicit drug toxicity the ongoing gang violence that we see the ongoing BC gang conflict which is fueled by fighting over the illicit drug trade and the resulting profitability and lastly overall crime which you know in Vancouver roughly two-thirds of all of our crime is property crime and it's almost you know the vast majority of that is fueled by unaddressed substance use disorder or what people will casually call addiction and untreated mental health and so we look across all three of these areas and we're eager to see public safety gains in all three areas but you know in looking at drug policy and innovating in drug policy we want to see public safety advancements in all three of these areas to make our community safer on the amounts of drugs do you know of any legitimate organizations in Canada that would be able to supply them meth cocaine and heroin in those amounts or does this negatively necessarily come from similar drugging? Well that that I believe is what has been sourced in previous media engagements by Dolph themselves but definitely you know in terms of achieving people getting sourcing a safe supply of those substances there's definitely you know challenges issues with trying to find pharmaceutical companies that will produce these substances or have the availability to to deliver them so Is there really no legit way to get that much meth cocaine? I wouldn't I wouldn't say there's no way but I mean you know for research purpose or or what have you there probably is you maybe can there's medical grade heroin there are ways to source substances whether for you know a pharmaceutical need such as like fentanyl there is a pharmacy legitimate pharmaceutical uses there's pharmaceutical companies that produce it but with all of those it is controlled they are substances that are governed by the controlled drugs and substance acts so you need the the proper legal permissions to produce them to sell them to buy them so you mentioned free like public safety threats and you looked at the law I also understand the connection between that and Dolph it seems to me that Dolph was actually trying to bury all of those for you guys? Well I would I would say I would say you know definitely when we've seen people discuss you know illicit supplies of drugs and saying that they're tested and therefore safe that would speak to the first public safety threat the overdose crisis but then it gets into discussion around how does the drug strategy or what's being proposed impact the other two avenues so in terms of organized crime where are these drugs being sourced from are they being sourced legally from a legal pharmaceutical manufacturer or are they being sourced from the dark web invariably from organized crime which I think in this case you know Dolph has made comments on themselves and then lastly are these substances being prescribed by a doctor are they essentially provided to people who use drugs or are they sold in which case that in my mind doesn't address the underlying need to go out to commit you know petty survival crimes to address addiction so you know we're happy to have open conversations around drug policies ways we can innovate as a society but you know we're always going to look at those three public safety areas and say you know can we achieve benefits in all of them not just one of them no I wouldn't I would I'd be I'd be guessing so I would do it a disservice if I if I guess but no that's something I'd have to get back to you on thank you everybody is there any other questions we have that come up later media at db.ca thank you