A former lead police investigator of the arson of Hamilton's Hindu Samaj Temple was involved in a cocaine-fuelled sexual relationship with a crucial informant in the case months before charges were laid in November 2013. Ian Matthews, a beloved cop known to friends as "Blarney," walked into Central police station on Dec. 17, 2013, and killed himself the day after then-chief Glenn De Caire gave his authorization to notify Matthews he was under investigation for his inappropriate — and possibly criminal — relationship with the woman. The relationship between Matthews and the informant, who can only be named as Jane Doe by a court order, is alleged to have also included two incidents of sexual assault. Matthews was also found to have been funnelling confidential information about the arson investigation to the woman even though he was no longer assigned to the case. The woman knew the arson suspects and provided police with vital information about the case. A Spectator investigation two years in the making now raises serious questions about Matthews' misbehaviour, how it was handled by police and whether his misconduct compromised the outcome of the temple arson case. Jane Doe's allegations have been investigated by Hamilton police, Niagara police and the Office of the Independent Police Review Director. The OIPRD has substantiated several of her claims and the Spectator has viewed some of the hundreds of text messages exchanged between Matthews and Jane Doe that also support her claims. Christopher Pollard, Damien Marsh and Scott Ryan all had their arson charges withdrawn in 2014 and accepted deals to plead guilty instead to mischief charges in exchange for no jail time. They each received sentences of three years' probation, 80 hours of community service and to make $10,000 charitable donations for what police described as a "hate crime" that took place just days after the 9-11 terrorist attacks. At the time the men were charged, at least five high-ranking Hamilton police officers — including De Caire, a deputy chief and two superintendents — were aware of the allegations of drug use and an inappropriate sexual relationship between Matthews and the informant. Kevin McKenna, the Crown attorney who offered the plea deals, was also aware of the allegations against Matthews but says they played "no role in my thinking or in the conduct of this case or in the conduct of the investigation." However, Ramesh Panchal, president of the Hindu Samaj Temple, says he's now concerned because the information about Matthews was never disclosed to his community by the Crown or police. The Reporters Steve Buist Molly Hayes Bill Dunphy This report was researched and written by reporters Steve Buist and Molly Hayes and former Spec reporter Bill Dunphy. The Spectator’s View The compelling public interest to tell this story. Newsroom Insider Some stories are not easy to tell because they are disturbing, unsettling and bring discredit to a person or institution we hold high, writes managing editor Jim Poling. Next In Monday's Spectator: Temple arson case highlights need for independent review of police sex assaults. More on arson case Read past stories about the trials of the accused, and the aftermath of the arson on Hamilton. "This is really explosive and I am shocked," said Panchal, who only learned of the allegations when contacted by the Spectator.

Davin Charney, a Toronto lawyer representing Jane Doe, said he's deeply troubled by the lack of police transparency.

"Why is it left for the victim in all of this to bring to the public's attention this outrageous police misconduct?" Charney asked. "If it wasn't for Jane Doe, no one would even know about this stuff."

Jane Doe has now launched a lawsuit against Hamilton police and De Caire, which is currently sealed from public view.

This is the second case to come to light in the past two months alleging serious misconduct within the Hamilton Police Service. In April, a joint Spectator-Toronto Star investigation revealed shocking allegations of police corruption contained in a lawsuit filed by Hamilton police officer Paul Manning.

Sex, drugs and police misconduct Questions remain over whether temple arson case was compromised by the behaviour of its former lead investigator The first true snowfall of the season was coating the city when the news conference began at Hamilton's Hindu Samaj Temple.

It was Nov. 27, 2013 and with both the police chief and mayor in attendance, there was no mistaking the importance of the event.

A dozen years earlier, with the world's nerves badly frayed just four days after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, the Hindu temple, reportedly mistaken for a mosque, was destroyed by fire. The arson case had long gone unsolved, to the frustration of police and the temple community.

A 2013 news conference at the Hindu Samaj Temple announcing three arrests had been made in the September 2001 arson at the temple. (L-R) Hamilton Police Chief Glenn DeCaire, Deputy Chiefs Ken Leendertse and Eric Girt, Hamilton Mayor Bob Bratina and Brenda Johnson, Hamilton city councillor for Ward 11 were all in attendance, indicating the significance of the announcement. Inside the rebuilt temple on that snowy morning, Glenn De Caire, then chief of police, announced three suspects had been charged with arson. A vile case that put Hamilton on the map for the wrong reasons seemed to be finally wrapping up. Then something unexpected happened.

A year later, the three suspects — Christopher Pollard, Damien Marsh and Scott Ryan — all had their arson charges withdrawn. Instead, they accepted deals to plead guilty to mischief charges. All three were handed the same sentences: three years' probation, 80 hours of community service and they were required to make $10,000 charitable donations. The result meant no jail time for the perpetrators of a notorious act described by police as a "hate crime."

The temple community spoke of forgiveness and healing and moving on. And that was that, it seemed.

Behind the scenes, however, two people had been sharing an explosive secret that could have damaged the sensitive arson investigation. One of them was the late Ian Matthews, a former lead police investigator of the temple fire.

Three weeks after the arson charges were laid, Matthews walked into the locker-room at the Central police station in downtown Hamilton, pulled out a gun and killed himself with a shot to the head.

The other person who knew the secret was Jane Doe, as she must be identified by a court order. She knew the arson suspects and she provided vital information that helped police crack the case.

A Spectator investigation two years in the making can now reveal that in the months leading up to the announcement of the arson charges, Matthews had allegedly been having a cocaine-fuelled sexual relationship with Jane Doe, the key informant.

Jane Doe claims she was also sexually assaulted by Matthews on more than one occasion, including one incident that allegedly involved the barrel of Matthews' service pistol.

She alleges Matthews was providing her with confidential information about the arson investigation even though he was no longer assigned to the case at the time.

She alleges Matthews would occasionally give her money and that she was told she would eventually be able to claim a $30,000 reward for her role in the case.

She alleges some of the cocaine they used was stolen by Matthews from confiscated narcotics held at the police station. She alleges she once watched Matthews purchase cocaine from a dealer.

The Spectator's investigation raises troubling questions about Matthews' actions and how they were handled by police. Among them:

1. Why was Matthews still working a case he had been pulled from, and apparently without the knowledge of his supervisors?

2. Did he feed Jane Doe confidential information that could have compromised the arson investigation?

3. Why did it take two months from the time Jane Doe told Hamilton police about Matthews until a decision was made to notify him he was under investigation?

4. Why did an incident heinous enough to be called a "hate crime" result in no jail time for the perpetrators?

5. Was the outcome of the arson investigation influenced by Matthews' misbehaviour?

As De Caire announced the arson charges at the temple, he had already known some of these allegations for more than a month. So did a number of other high-ranking Hamilton officers, including two superintendents and then-deputy chief Eric Girt, who was elevated to chief last month.

They knew about the allegations of drug use and the inappropriate sexual relationship between Matthews and the informant.

They would have realized the police were open to allegations the arson investigation had been compromised by Matthews' misconduct.

The Crown attorney who arranged the plea deals also became aware of some of the allegations relating to Matthews. He would be briefed on them by De Caire and provided with a report prepared by two Niagara police officers brought in to conduct an independent external investigation.

On Dec. 16, 2013, De Caire gave his authorization to formally notify Matthews he was under investigation for a number of possible violations of the Police Services Act.

The next day, Matthews took his life.

Hamilton police Detective Sergeant Ian Matthews was once lead investigator in the temple arson case. We'll never know Matthews' side of the story or why he was involved with an informant in a case no longer assigned to him. He kept no notes of his contacts with Jane Doe and he died before being formally served notice he was under investigation.

Jane Doe, however, first made serious allegations about Matthews two years ago in several interviews with the Spectator shortly after his death.

She then made the same graphic allegations last year in a lengthy complaint filed with the Office of the Independent Police Review Director, a civilian oversight agency that receives, manages and oversees all complaints about police in Ontario.

Her complaint is supported in part by hundreds of text messages exchanged with Matthews, including a number of sex-related messages he sent her. Those text messages have been seen by Hamilton and Niagara police, OIPRD investigators and the Spectator.

The OIPRD has substantiated several of her claims.

Following an investigation of Jane Doe's complaint, the OIPRD determined in February that Matthews was "engaged in an inappropriate relationship" with Jane Doe "that involved sex, drugs and money."

The report also determined Matthews provided Jane Doe with investigative information about the arson case "even though he was no longer the assigned investigator."

The OIPRD determined there was sufficient evidence to find that Matthews engaged in discreditable conduct and breach of confidentiality. Because Matthews was deceased, no further actions were taken.

Davin Charney, a Toronto lawyer representing Jane Doe, said her allegations raise troubling questions about the way the arson case was handled.

"To me it seems astounding and, in fact, shocking that these three individuals would not go to jail for burning down a religious temple, a hate crime," said Charney. "It's really shocking and outrageous."

This is the second major case this year alleging serious misconduct by Hamilton police.

Officer Paul Manning makes a number of shocking allegations of corruption in a $6.75-million suit he's filed against Hamilton police after alleging a botched undercover operation led to an attempt on his life.

Manning also alleges in his lawsuit he was informed by a police-related source that prior to his death, Matthews was under criminal investigation for fraud against Crime Stoppers.

None of Manning's allegations have been proven in court.

Jane Doe has now launched a lawsuit against Hamilton police and De Caire. The lawsuit is currently sealed from public view, and her identity is protected by a court order.

In addition to its report on Matthews' behaviour, the OIPRD issued a report on De Caire's actions.

Jane Doe complained De Caire neglected his duty because he should have notified the province's Special Investigations Unit about Matthews' alleged sexual assault against her. The SIU's mandate requires a notification if a police officer is facing an allegation of sexual assault.

She also complained that De Caire engaged in deceit by misleading the public and members of the Hindu temple community.

In both cases, the OIPRD found her complaints against De Caire were unsubstantiated.

Based on the content and context of the information provided to him, the OIPRD stated, it's not clear De Caire was aware of the sexual assault allegation before Matthews died.

The OIPRD also noted, "De Caire did not attempt to cover up this event or mislead the public, which would have included members of the Hindu temple."

De Caire, now the designate director of security and parking at McMaster University, declined to comment and asked the Spectator to direct its questions to the Hamilton Police Service.

A Hamilton police spokesperson stated the laws governing complaints against officers prevent the service from providing comment in this case.

"The service is in full support of governance, civilian oversight and accountability and takes allegations against its officers seriously," spokesperson Catherine Martin stated.

"We want the community to know that, as a service, we comply with the requirements imposed by the legislation," she added.

Lloyd Ferguson, chair of the Hamilton Police Services Board, said he can't comment because Jane Doe's allegations remain before the court. "I want to stress this case again is allegations only," said Ferguson, councillor for Ancaster.

He said the board received the OIPRD report on De Caire, "which stated the chief's actions were appropriate and there was no wrongdoing on his part," said Ferguson.

What follows is based on two OIPRD investigative reports related to Jane Doe's complaint, interviews with her and others connected to the case including the Crown attorney, text messages between Jane Doe and Matthews and previously published reports about the temple arson.

May 2013 | 'Sex, drugs and money' Ian Matthews was certainly beloved by many in Hamilton, even those on the wrong side of the law. He's been described as a charming, larger-than-life figure with a gift of the gab.

"Blarney," as he was widely known, grew up in Northern Ireland and started his career walking a beat in Belfast.

He arrived in Canada in 1988, joined Hamilton police and worked his way up the ladder through a number of high-profile units.

He made his mark first as an undercover officer, occasionally being planted in jail cells to try to extract information for a case. Later, he served as an investigator in the homicide unit.

In 2011, Matthews was the lead investigator of the temple arson when there was a break in the decade-old case. Police announced they had DNA profiles from a group of people who had been drinking at the site just before the fire started.

By 2013, though, Matthews was a uniformed staff sergeant at Central station and no longer assigned to the arson case.

For reasons we may never know, he stayed involved in the investigation, which led him to cross paths with Jane Doe.

She knew the suspects in the case and was a valuable source of information about the arson, having first learned about their involvement in the fire back in 2003.

Jane Doe has significant credibility issues.

She was interviewed several times by police and OIPRD investigators over a two-year period and with each interview, her allegations grew more serious and more spectacular.

As an OIPRD report noted, "it cannot be ignored that each time a statement was given, or complaint made, some very significant information was added that had not been disclosed before."

She was suffering from depression during the time she interacted with Matthews and she has bipolar disorder.

Jane Doe has been charged with fraud previously and she told officers investigating her complaint she was a former addict who had been clean for two years before Matthews reintroduced her to cocaine.

In mid-May 2013, Jane Doe called police and asked to speak with Matthews. It's not clear if she found his name from an outdated web page about the arson or if she already knew him from a previous investigation.

After speaking with Matthews, she met him behind the former police station on Upper Wellington Street and provided him with information on the arson. She alleges he told her at some point she could be charged as an accessory if she didn't cooperate.

They began exchanging text messages and one of the earliest ones from Matthews reads, "Working on reward. How much do you need."

On the night of May 17, they met at the Beaver and Bulldog pub on the Mountain. When Jane Doe arrived, Matthews appeared intoxicated and allegedly made sexual advances to her.

They got in Jane Doe's car and drove to a parking lot at the Holy Spirit Sanctuary on Fennell Avenue West.

Matthews began taking her clothes off, ripping her bra in the process. She would later claim he sexually assaulted her that night with the barrel of his service pistol.

They engaged in oral sex then she drove Matthews back to his car.

She would tell investigators she eventually consented to the sex acts because he was in a position of authority and "she didn't know what else to do."

The next day, Matthews sent Jane Doe a number of sex-related text messages and repeatedly tried to convince her to come to his house in Caledonia.

He also texted her he kept a .45-calibre handgun under his pillow. "Don't want an accident …" he texted. She says she took that as a veiled threat.

On May 19, Matthews sent Jane Doe more sex-related texts. That night, Jane Doe drove to Matthews' house.

He tried to have intercourse with her but she dissuaded him by saying she was menstruating. She performed oral sex on him instead. She alleged they consumed cocaine that night.

Two days later, Matthews told Jane Doe by text he would contact Crime Stoppers to help her get some money.

The following day, Matthews texted her that he spoke with Crime Stoppers and that he lied about their connection to help facilitate a reward.

She alleged that Matthews gave her hundreds of dollars during their brief relationship, which appeared to have come from him personally.

In her OIPRD complaint, Jane Doe alleged she was also sexually assaulted at Matthews' house once when he pulled her hair and choked her during sex.

In her interviews with police and the OIPRD, Jane Doe alleged Matthews on more than one occasion drove with her to an ATM, withdrew money and gave it to her to buy cocaine. On another occasion, she claims she watched him buy cocaine from a dealer on Upper Gage Avenue.

She also claims she was at his house once when he brought out a Ziploc bag of cocaine with the word "Evidence" written on it. The bag had allegedly been removed from a police evidence locker.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

She told the OIPRD investigators the amount of cocaine in the bag was "way more" than any person would need.

October 2013 | Secrets are revealed By the fall of 2013, Jane Doe learned the investigation of the temple arson was now being led by Staff Sgt. Matt Kavanagh.

On Oct. 1, she met with Kavanagh at the Central police station. Kavanagh told the OIPRD their conversation was only about the arson investigation and that Jane Doe was afraid of one of the three suspects.

A news conference was held at the Hindu Samaj Temple in November 2013 announcing that police had made three arrests in the Sept. 2001 arson of the temple. Here, Hamilton Police Staff Sergeant Matt Kavanagh announces the three arrests. Jane Doe, however, alleges she told Kavanagh that day about Matthews' inappropriate behaviour. She claims she used the term "sexual assault" and that she had text messages to support her claims.

On Oct. 13, Jane Doe called Kavanagh's cellphone while he was off duty. This is the date Kavanagh says he learned about the sexual relationship between Matthews and Jane Doe, along with allegations of cocaine use.

He told her to stop and not reveal any more details. She would have to wait until he was on duty because her complaint needed to be investigated formally and it would have to be handled by a different officer.

Two days later, on Oct. 15, Jane Doe was interviewed by Hamilton police detective Catherine Lockley.

Jane Doe reported allegations of sexual encounters with Matthews, drug use, cocaine purchases and the exchange of money from Matthews to her. She also told the detective about the text messages, which were downloaded by police.

Lockley concluded Jane Doe was reporting an inappropriate relationship with Matthews and that she had been pressured into the relationship because he was a police officer. Lockley passed the information to Kavanagh.

That evening, Kavanagh met with Jane Doe and her mother. He claims Jane Doe never told him that day that she had been sexually assaulted, only that she was involved in a sexual relationship with Matthews.

By this point, Jane Doe's allegations of an inappropriate sexual relationship and drug use involving Matthews were quickly making their way up the police hierarchy.

Supt. Dan Kinsella learned of the allegations from Kavanagh the same day.

De Caire, too, was informed of Jane Doe's allegations by Girt.

According to an OIPRD report, "De Caire was informed that a relationship had started between (Jane Doe) and Matthews.

"They would meet up while he was working, meet for drinks at a bar, meet for sex and that games were played where he provided cocaine to her during sex games," the report stated.

"Everything he heard led him to conclude the ongoing sexual relationship was consensual, involved alcohol and possibly drugs," according to the report. "He concluded based on the information known that a Police Act investigation needed to be conducted."

De Caire was provided some of their text messages and the content "confirmed his belief that the relationship was consensual," according to the OIPRD.

De Caire immediately phoned his counterpart at Niagara Regional Police and requested his service conduct an independent investigation into Jane Doe's allegations.

Because he believed the relationship was consensual, De Caire decided there was no need to notify the SIU. The SIU would eventually agree with his decision.

December 2013 | A life ends, a mystery deepens Insp. CindyWhite, head of the Niagara police Professional Standards Bureau, and her colleague, Det. Sgt. Kim McAllister, conducted the external investigation into Matthews.

On Dec. 6, 2013, they recorded an interview with Jane Doe.

She repeated her earlier allegations and added some important information.

She told the Niagara officers that during her first meeting with Matthews, he told her he had already looked into her background and knew a lot about her and her family, including her past drug use.

Jane Doe told them she twice tried to pull her car over to tell Matthews to get out on the night they ended up in the Holy Spirit Sanctuary parking lot "but she didn't want to make a scene as he was a police officer ... and she had to listen to him," according to an OIPRD report.

She also told them "she felt at times she was sexually assaulted because it was someone in a position of authority who was taking advantage of her and putting her under the use of drugs," an OIPRD report states.

On Dec. 9, White contacted Supt. Debbie Clark, head of the Professional Standards Bureau for Hamilton police, to update her on the interview with Jane Doe.

According to an OIPRD report, White told Clark that Jane Doe believed she was sexually assaulted by Matthews.

But White also told Clark, according to the report, that while White believed there had been repeated sexual encounters between the two, she didn't believe there had been a sexual assault.

White based her opinion on a few factors: the allegation didn't make sense; Jane Doe's recollection was selective, vague and self-serving; and Jane Doe had a poor memory, relying heavily on the text messages.

"She and Supt. Clark shared the opinion that it was not a case of sexual assault," according to an OIPRD report.

Clark, however, maintained the Niagara officer didn't mention to her that Jane Doe "felt she was sexually assaulted by Matthews," according to the report.

On Dec. 16, Clark met with other senior Hamilton officers to determine when to serve Matthews with notice he was under investigation for possible Police Services Act violations.

"She was advised Chief De Caire authorized the notice being given," according to an OIPRD report.

The following day, Matthews killed himself at the Central station. He was 47.

It's not known if Matthews somehow learned informally about the investigation before he died.

February 2014 | An arson becomes mischief On Feb. 7, 2014, the two Niagara officers met with Hamilton superintendents Clark and Kinsella to brief them on the Matthews investigation and provide them with a copy of their report.

Clark told the OIPRD she didn't read the report but provided it to De Caire that same day.

The Niagara report "did not contain information that concluded a sexual assault had occurred or even referred to an allegation of a sexual assault," according to the OIPRD.

It did, however, contain transcript portions of Jane Doe's interview where she stated "she felt at times she had been sexually assaulted by Matthews because of his position of authority," the OIPRD stated.

"Chief De Caire still did not conclude that a sexual assault had occurred based on the context of her statement, her previous statements and especially the text messages," the OIPRD added.

De Caire immediately met with the Crown attorneys assigned to the arson case, updated them and supplied them with a copy of the Niagara officers' investigative report on Matthews.

Kevin McKenna, Crown attorney for the case, said in an interview he was given the Niagara report but did not disclose it to the defence lawyers. Under the rules of evidence and disclosure, McKenna said, the defence could have made an application to have the report turned over and "they chose not to do so."

Hamilton lawyer Peter Boushy, who represented one of the suspects, declined to speculate on any reasons why the report wasn't turned over.

"It's not really appropriate for me to judge the Crown's actions," Boushy said. "I've had dealings with Kevin for about 15 years and he's an honourable person."

McKenna said the defence lawyers were aware of the allegations relating to Matthews — "they knew about them before I did," he said — and they were discussed during the negotiations between the Crown and the defence.

"As one defence counsel told me, he said 'We've looked at it and decided there is absolutely no point in dancing on Ian Matthews' grave,'" McKenna said. "'There's no point in embarrassing him just for the sake of it.'

"They were fully armed with all this information," McKenna added.

McKenna said the defence lawyers asked for the arson charges to be replaced with mischief charges because it sounded better for their clients.

"From the Crown's perspective, it doesn't make any difference," said McKenna. "They're both equally serious.

"Arson just means you set a fire and cause damage. Mischief means you cause damage by any means.

"If you look at the facts, they caused damage by burning a place down," he said. "From my perspective, if someone wants to call it mischief over $5,000 or arson, it's six of one, half dozen of the other."

On Oct. 28, 2014, Christopher Pollard and Damien Marsh had the arson charges withdrawn against them for the temple fire and they agreed to plead guilty to two mischief charges each.

The Hindu Samaj Temple on Twenty Road was being demolished Sept. 20, 2001, five days after fire tore through the facility early on a Saturday morning. According to the agreed statement of facts, they started at the Hamilton Mosque, where they were drinking and throwing beer bottles at a window. They then drove to the nearby Hindu temple, drank some more and tossed a Molotov cocktail at the door, starting a blaze that burned for some time.

Scott Ryan, the third man charged, pleaded guilty to the same deal two months later. They were each sentenced to three years' probation, 80 hours of community service and to make $10,000 in charitable donations.

At the time, McKenna said the Hindu community was "extensively" involved in determining the sentences.

There was talk of forgiveness in the temple community's victim impact statement, which was read out in court.

"We stand on the moral ground of reconciliation over retaliation in accordance with the teachings of our religion," read the statement.

But the president of the Hindu Samaj Temple now says his community was never informed of the serious allegations surrounding Matthews by either the Crown or the police.

"This is completely news to me," said Ramesh Panchal, who says he's been a temple board member for four decades. He was the secretary of the temple when the three men were sentenced.

"This is not going to be sitting well with some of the board members or some of the senior members of the temple," he added.

McKenna said he didn't tell the temple community about the allegations against Matthews because they were "totally irrelevant" and "inconsequential to the proceedings."

"That's not something I would have discussed with them," McKenna said.

Panchal said his community was consulted about the sentencing. He's not sure if having the information about Matthews would have had any influence.

He did say, however, there was concern and some division within the temple community when the arson charges were replaced with mischief charges.

"But then we thought it's 12 or 13 years later, at least the police did their job and we were quite happy with the police that they were able to nab the perpetrators," Panchal said.

"We just wanted to close the case."

McKenna, meanwhile, is adamant that Matthews' misconduct with Jane Doe did not compromise the temple arson investigation.

He also said he wasn't concerned the allegations about Matthews could have become public if the arson case had proceeded to a trial.

"I don't want to sound brazen or cavalier but professionally, I couldn't care less," said McKenna. "If it came out, it came out. I had no interest in trying to protect his character or his legacy."

The same goes for Jane Doe, who is now trying to rebuild her life.

"It's created so much turmoil, so much upheaval," she said. "It's ruined my life.

"It's always there," she added. "You can't escape it."