In 2004, two teenage boys named Sebastian Burns and Atif Rafay were convicted in the 1994 murder of Rafay’s parents in their Bellevue home. The physical evidence was scant and the strongest piece of evidence against Burns and Rafay was a videotaped confession made by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (Burns and Rafay were Canadian citizens). The confession was obtained through a sting operation called “Mr. Big” – it is where undercover officers befriend the suspects and offer to destroy evidence for the targets as long as they offer a mea culpa confession. People targeted have said that when they say that they don’t want to participate, they are coerced through threats of physical violence, up to and including being murdered themselves. In the United States, it would almost certainly be considered a violation against the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination. The confession was allowed to be used against Burns and Rafay because they were Canadian citizens and the confession did not violate Canadian law.

Sebastian Burns’ sister Tiffany made an enormously compelling film about this procedure, named Mr. Big. She uses the case of her brother as a starting point for discussion of these undercover tactics and what effect has had on both American and Canadian justice systems. It is a powerful film that serves as a cautionary tale of what can happen to people caught up in operations like this. It also shows the effects first-hand of the pain families of crime suspects go through.

Mr. Big screened at the Seattle International Film Festival in early June and Tiffany Burns was kind enough to find time during her commute from Vancouver to talk with me about her movie.

At the end of our conversation, she asked me to let readers know that if they want to learn more about the film and this case, to check out the film’s website at mrbigthemovie.com or the website set up for Sebastian Burns’ and Atif Rafay’s appeal: rafayburnsappeal.com.

One of the things that really struck me about this film is that it is about questionable police tactics from the Canadian government. I hear a lot of people refer to Canada as a liberal utopia because they are progressive on gay marriage or marijuana and have a lower drinking age, but in this film you demonstrate that the tactics of Mr. Big operations would not be admissible in an American court.

A lot of people express shock when they see it. I’ve shown it at film festivals in Europe, US and Canada. Everyone says the same thing: they’re shocked that the Canadian police are doing this type of sting. Ironically, a lot of Americans tell me that you expect this to happen in the US but not in Canada. It shows you just how powerful the image of the Mounties is. They have such powerful branding. For a while, Disney managed their brand. When people think of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, they think of Dudley Do-Right in a pretty, red jacket riding a horse and keeping a watchful eye on the people. They have no idea that if one wants to, they can dress up like Tony Soprano and intimidate you and make you tell them what they want to hear or they will do something terrible to you, or your mother, or your wife.

It doesn’t seem like they have any accountability. In the film you try to get an interview with a spokesman over the phone to ask general questions about their operation (budget, time, etc…) and he doesn’t want to speak to you and gives general, almost evasive, answers throughout the film.

You hit the nail on the head. There is no accountability from the RCMP. They are not accountable to the Canadian people even though they are funded by Canadian taxpayer dollars. When something happens that needs to be investigated, they do their own internal investigation. There are no public watch-over investigations of their practices. They investigate themselves. I think the Canadian people are becoming very concerned about this and the details of the Mr. Big stings becoming public. The RCMP always asks for, and gets, a gag order for cases involving this sting operation so the press was hamstrung on these cases. They public would just hear that someone confessed to murder and were left thinking that someone just walked into a police station and said “I did it”. They would have no idea about the weeks and months, and even up to a year, that was spent to get these confessions. Or even the money spent on odd jobs by the organization. Until just a few years ago, these cases were never made public until the Supreme Court ruled the media could report on these cases, they had not reached the awareness of the average Canadian citizen.

What kind of reaction do you get when you show the film?

When I showed it in Europe, the audiences couldn’t believe this was allowed to go on – especially in a place like Canada that has a reputation for being fair and just. Every European told me that there was no way that type of sting operation would be allowed in their country. The really disturbing thing with Mr. Big operations is that if you get a confession, it should add up and corroborate the physical evidence from the crime scene or lead you to a murder weapon, or you might learn things only the true murderer would know. However, that is rarely the case. The police are under so much pressure to get confessions and they feel the need to prosecute every one. Unfortunately, in all of the cases in my documentary, the confessions don’t corroborate the evidence found at the crime scene and in many cases contradict it. Police turn a blind eye to that; they have Mr. Big tunnel-vision.

There was an expert witness in the film who walked you through the transcript of the “confession” in your brother’s case and said that the undercover officers stopped the conversation when anything exculpatory was said. It was as though they were seeking a confession and not the truth.

Yeah, the guy you are referring to is named Michael Levine. The thing about him is that he is not against Mr. Big stings. He thinks they are effective. He’s a former drug enforcement agent with undercover ops. If he was allowed to be an expert witness in my brother’s case, he would have shown what a shoddy operation that particular sting was.

There were actually two expert witnesses barred from testifying. One was Michael Levine. The other was Richard Leo, who is a world-renowned expert on false confessions. (King County) Judge (Charles) Mertel had some flimsy reasons for excluding their testimony but those are grounds for appeal.

In a few hours from now you’re going to show this film to audiences at the Seattle International Film Festival. Is this the first time showing it to an audience so close to Bellevue, where the murders took place?

I did show it to law students at the University of Washington but that was a private screening. I haven’t had a public screening before the Seattle Film Festival. I have shown it in BC, though; in Victoria, in Vancouver, in Portland, Chicago, Winnipeg. It was the people’s choice for best film at the Canadian Film Festival in Toronto. It has been shown globally. I do have a distributor for broadcast in Europe.

What about in the US or Canada?

I would love to see it shown in North America. It is very important to show it because the US has a justice system that is against this type of entrapment but they are okay with using evidence as long as you aren’t an American citizen. It’s a dangerous precedent because it’s psychological torture. It is the same thing as saying “we’re American and against torture but this guy is Syrian. Let’s send him back to Syria and have them torture a confession out of him and use that confession in an American court of law.” All Americans should be concerned about this slippery-slope.

I’d love to see it happen (being broadcast in the US and Canada) but if I don’t hear anything for a few months the film will definitely be available for DVD purchase and download. It could be six months. These things always take a really long time. I think we’ll first concentrate on sales. It’s been an interesting selection of countries that has purchased the film so far: Israel, Sweden and Poland. It is intriguing to me to see who is interested in it.

How is the appeal in your brother’s case going?

It is still ongoing. They’re working on their appellate brief right now. Who knows how long that is going to take? This thing has taken so damn long already. I’m pretty disgusted with the legal system right now. They were convicted in 2004 and now it is 2008 and their appeal is barely being filed. It took 18 months for the transcripts to be written. Their appeal lawyers couldn’t do anything for 18 months while they were sitting in jail. It took so long to get their transcripts written.

Are you looking forward to showing your film before a Seattle/Northwest audience?

I always hoped it would screen in Seattle and I was really excited when the Seattle Film Festival accepted the movie. I think Seattle audiences have been subjected to one-sided, vitriolic media reports for more than a decade. I think the average person is smarter than that. I’m happy to bring them the back story. I think they wonder why they only heard one side to this story.

I’m a little nervous, too. I hope (King County deputy prosecutor James) Konat doesn’t show up to heckle me.

Have you tried to interview Konat or Mertel?

No. They got enough TV time. If you want to hear their side, look up every single other story. My film was going to be about the people you don’t get access to. Sometimes I hear critiques that say it is one-sided but it is pretty clear in the film that I was trying to get the Royal Canadian Mounted Police’s side of the story but they didn’t want to cooperate. I wasn’t going to let that hold me back from making this film. I didn’t talk to any of the prosecutors.

To reiterate, you can watch “48 Hours” or read any of the coverage of this case and get 90% prosecution sound bites. I think it’s pretty clear that I’m Sebastian Burns’ sister. I think audiences are savvy enough to take the information from the film and weigh it against whatever else they might have heard.