Best evidence still to come

Page 5

When speaking after they've been assured their names won't get into print, many lawyers tell us frankly that public inquiries, at best, can only be about raising awareness. When the authorities set the rules for inquests into matters where they themselves may have some level of blame, the limits set are narrow and designed to protect jobs, pensions, reputations and the public purse.

Typically, blame cannot be assessed at a public inquiry and it's virtually unheard of that any bombshell dropped by a witness will lead to anyone being held truly accountable. And still, the quaint little community hall on the upstairs level of the hockey rink in the town of Forest, Ont. where the current session of the Ipperwash Inquiry is being staged is stuffed full of lawyers. Each of them are representing some stakeholder or other and doing his or her level best to keep the focus away from anything that might embarrass their client. And officials still continue to pretend that inquiries are all about the search for the truth.

As we went to press on Sept. 29, it had only been a matter of hours since the public had been dismissed from the Forest Memorial Community Centre's Kimball Hall while all the lawyers and Justice Sidney Linden held an in-camera session to hear a tape that the lawyers for Sam George, brother of slain protester Dudley, call shocking and explosive. Murray Klippenstein and Andrew Orkin can't tell us what's on that audio tape because of the inquiry's rules about confidentiality. But they leaned out over the line a few weeks back to let the public know that they were outraged and alarmed by what the tape contained.

The tape will eventually be released, the inquiry commission's staff assure us, but only after those 20 odd lawyers get their chance to put a spin on it.

Lawyers and judges say that the best evidence must be sought when seeking to determine the facts of a case beyond a reasonable doubt. But the Ontario Provincial Police service was represented at the inquiry and is bending over backwards not only to keep the best evidence secret, but to resist efforts by Ontario's Information and Privacy Commission, to look at how they handled that evidence. Assistent commissioner Tom Mitchinson, without making up his mind, is attempting quite earnestly to perform due diligence in satisfying himself that no evidence was destroyed or altered while in the control of the OPP. And the OPP is using every legal device available to it to stop him. What does that say?

The officers who did wrong on that fateful night at Ipperwash Provincial Park are hiding behind the fact that all cops wear the same uniform. That form of anonymity is a device that bad cops and others are exploiting. And there were many bad cops there that night.

Acting Sgt. Kenneth Deane was convicted of criminal negligence and lost his job. That's one. Trial judge Hugh Fraser concluded that several OPP officers "concocted ex post facto" their testimony before him to try and get Deane off. That's several more. And when Kettle and Stoney Point band councillor Cecil George was beaten so severely that his heart stopped, every one of those 50 cops who either participated in or observed the beating and said nothing, well, they forfeited their right to be called decent citizens.

And we must never forget Judge Fraser's statement that "the decision to embark on this ill-fated mission was not Sgt. Deane's."

Commission counsel Susan M. Vella, while examining witness Marlin Simon, repeatedly assured him that she understood that he might have a hard time remembering some of the facts, because it had been nine years since Dudley's shooting. She's right, of course. But is anyone holding anyone accountable for that?

Two successive Ontario governments stonewalled calls for this inquiry for more than eight years. The George family called for it within weeks of Dudley's death.

Shouldn't there be, at the very least, an apology coming from the government f Ontario and the Progressive Conservative Party that made us all wait for so long to get to this point?

Former premier Mike Harris has standing at the inquiry. His name will come up. And if he seeks to avoid answering any sticky questions when his turn comes by saying it was too long ago, we're saying right here and now that will be the moment when this inquiry becomes a farce.