11 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 February 21st, 2005 25
21 Appearances 2 Derry Millar ) Commission Counsel 3 Susan Vella ) 4 Donald Worme, Q.C. ) 5 Katherine Hensel ) 6 Jodie-Lynn Waddilove) (np) 7 8 Murray Klippenstein ) The Estate of Dudley 9 Vilko Zbogar ) (np) George and George 10 Andrew Orkin ) Family Group 11 Basil Alexander ) (np) (Student-at-law) 12 13 Peter Rosenthal ) Aazhoodena and George 14 Jackie Esmonde ) Family Group 15 16 Anthony Ross ) Residents of 17 Kevin Scullion ) (np) Aazhoodena (Army Camp) 18 19 William Henderson ) Kettle Point & Stoney 20 Jonathon George ) Point First Nation 21 22 Kim Twohig ) (np) Government of Ontario 23 Walter Myrka ) (np) 24 Sue Freeborn ) (np) 25 Michelle Pong )
31 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Janet Clermont ) Municipality of 3 David Nash ) (Np) Lambton Shores 4 5 Peter Downard ) The Honourable Michael 6 Bill Hourigan ) (Np) Harris 7 Jennifer McAleer ) 8 9 Nancy Spies ) (Np) Robert Runciman 10 Alice Mrozek ) (Np) 11 12 Harvey Stosberg ) (np) Charles Harnick 13 Jacqueline Horvat ) (np) 14 15 Douglas Sulman, Q.C. ) Marcel Beaubien 16 Trevor Hinnegan ) (np) 17 18 Mark Sandler ) (np) Ontario Provincial 19 Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) Ontario Provincial Police 20 Leslie Kaufman ) (np) 21 Peter West ) (np) 22 Nagai On Young ) 23 24 25
41 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Ian Roland ) (np) Ontario Provincial 3 Karen Jones ) Police Association & 4 Debra Newell ) K. Deane 5 Ian McGilp ) (np) 6 Annie Leeks ) (np) 7 8 Julian Falconer ) (np) Aboriginal Legal 9 Brian Eyolfson ) Services of Toronto 10 Julian Roy ) (np) 11 12 Al J.C. O'Marra ) Office of the Chief 13 Robert Ash, Q.C. ) (np) Coroner 14 15 William Horton ) (np) Chiefs of Ontario 16 Matthew Horner ) 17 Kathleen Lickers ) (Np) 18 19 Mark Frederick ) (np) Christopher Hodgson 20 Craig Mills ) 21 Megan Mackey ) (np) 22 David Roebuck ) (Np) Debbie Hutton 23 Anna Perschy ) (np) 24 Melissa Panjer ) 25 Danya Cohen-Nehemia ) (np)
51 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 4 Exhibits 6 5 6 Discussion 10 7 8 CARL OTTO TOLSMO, Resumed 9 10 Continued Examination-In-Chief 11 by Ms. Susan Vella 15 12 Cross-Examination by Mr. Murray Klippenstein 67 13 Cross-Examination by Mr. Peter Rosenthal 71 14 Cross-Examination by Mr. Anthony Ross 99 15 Cross-Examination by Mr. William Henderson 133 16 Cross-Examination by Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson 146 17 Cross-Examination by Ms. Karen Jones 199 18 19 20 21 22 Certificate of Transcript 225 23 24 25
61 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page No 3 P-195 Document No. 9000014 May 06/93, letter 4 of Authority to the OPP Forest 5 Detachment from Stoney Point No. 43 6 First Nation signed by Carl. O. George 7 Chief and Maynard T. George, councillor, 8 Re: Occupation of traditional homes. 23 9 P-196 Document No. 90000483, June 01/'93 10 from Stoney Point No. 43 First Nation 11 signed by Carl. O. George, Chief and 12 Maynard T. George, councillor, To 13 Mr. Barry Redmond, Social and Family 14 Benefits, Sarnia, re: Listing of 15 Individuals and families needing 16 welfare assistance at the Stoney 17 Point First Nation Reserve No. 43. 24 18 P-197 Document No. 9000553, July 02/'92 19 preliminary draft Stoney Point 20 Band Membership List. 30 21 P-198 Document No. 9000038 September 21, 22 1993 letter from Ronald C. George, 23 Law Office to Kettle Point First 24 Nation, Attention Chief Tom Bressette 25 re Stoney Point land claim. 36
71 EXHIBITS (con'td) 2 No. Description Page No 3 P-199 Document No. 9000064, December 10/'93 4 Letter from Rose Marie Ur, MP 5 Lambton Middlesex to Chief Carl O. 6 George re: Land Settlement Dispute 7 between Camp Ipperwash and Stoney 8 Point Reserve. 37 9 P-200 Document No. 9000069, January 28/'94 10 Letter from Stoney Point No. 43 First 11 Nation To Mr. Richard Jock, Ontario 12 Regional Direction, Medical Services 13 Branch, Health & Welfare Canada re: 14 Proposed pre-transfer and transfer of 15 health services Stoney Point First Nation 46 16 P-201 Document No. 9000094 May 3rd, 1994 fax 17 to Hon. Ronald A. Irwin, R.C.M.P., 18 Minister of Indian Affairs from Anthony 19 Ross, Counsel for Chippewa of Kettle 20 & Stoney Point re: return of the lands 21 taken by Canada in 1943. 49 22 23 24 25
81 LIST OF EXHIBITS (cont'd) 2 Exhibit No. Description Page No. 3 P-202 Document No. 9000124, August 3rd, 4 1994, from Chief Carl George, 5 Stoney Point No. 43 to Hon. Ronald 6 A. Irwin, Minister of Indian Affairs 7 & Northern Developments re: Stoney 8 Point First Nations No. 43 return of 9 Land. 51 10 P-203 Document No. 9000123, Sept 21/'94 letter 11 from Hon. D.M. Collenette, Minister 12 of National Defense to Mr. Carl 13 George re Appropriation of Stoney 14 Point Reserve 52 15 P-204 Sarnia Observer article Suspicious 16 Fires Damage Buildings at Military 17 Camp, sent to Carl George with 18 notation "You're No Chief, You Stupid 19 Jerk." 61 20 P-205 Document No. 9000028, July 22/'93 21 list Of Stoney Point Members in 22 Attendance at Meeting in Toronto 126 23 24 25
91 EXHIBITS (con'td) 2 No. Description Page No 3 P-206 Document No. 9000253 May 3/'94 letter 4 to Rosemary Ur, MP from Stoney 5 Point First Nation No. 43 signed by 6 Carl George, Chief and Glenn M. 7 George, Councillor re: letter of 8 introduction and authorization 9 advising that Ronald C. George and 10 E. Anthony Ross are the legal advisers 11 working on behalf of The Stoney Point 12 First Nation No. 43 140 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
101 --- Upon commencing at 10:33 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session, the Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Good morning, 7 Commission. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 9 morning, everybody. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I just wanted to deal 11 with a couple of administrative things before we start. 12 The issue of the location of Mr. George's testimony, 13 we'll deal with tomorrow at the conclusion of Mr. 14 Tolsma's evidence or at an appropriate time. 15 I just wanted to -- everyone can see we've 16 tried to bring in this table here. It is an experiment 17 to see if it will help people in terms of bringing 18 material up for their examinations and we've also added a 19 -- a microphone that's a live microphone in terms of if 20 someone has an objection so that -- it works pretty well 21 in terms of people coming up to this microphone, but it 22 might make it a little easier. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good. Ms. 24 Vella, I understand you -- did you want to -- I have a 25 few things to say --
111 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, I -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- should I 3 wait until you complete your examination? 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I would suggest you 5 carry on with your comments. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. I 7 just have a couple of comments that I want to make before 8 we begin the cross-examination of Mr. Tolsma this 9 morning. I just want to say a few words about the status 10 of Part 2 of the Inquiry. 11 As you know, Part 1 of this Inquiry, the 12 evidentiary hearings, is designed to inquire into and 13 report on the events surrounding the death of Dudley 14 George. 15 As you also know, the other important 16 component of this Commission's mandate is to make 17 recommendations directed to the avoidance of violence in 18 similar circumstances. 19 The evidence that we've heard so far and 20 the evidence that we will be hearing in the forthcoming 21 weeks as well as the findings of fact that I make with 22 respect to that evidence, will form the basis for my 23 recommendations. 24 In addition, the extensive research and 25 consultations that we have embarked upon in Part 2 is
121 also important as it will inform and assist me in 2 developing those recommendations. 3 The general outline of the research agenda 4 has been posted on our website since October and we've 5 made significant progress since then. A more detailed 6 memo updating where we are from Mr. Nye Thomas, our 7 director of policy and research, and outlining the 8 progress that we've made will be forwarded to all parties 9 later this week, perhaps this afternoon or tomorrow. 10 We've commissioned more than twenty (20) 11 research papers from a variety of authors including 12 leading academics and community leaders. The papers 13 address a broad range of subject matters, such as 14 policing in aboriginal occupations, native land claims, 15 aboriginal burial and other sacred sites, relationships 16 between the government and law enforcement agencies. 17 We've now received a number of the papers 18 in draft form and we are in the process of seeking input 19 and comment on some of the papers. 20 Now, the nature and form of our 21 consultation will vary depending on the subject matter of 22 the paper, timing, logistics and cost. In some cases, 23 the consultation will take the form of a community 24 meeting where people will be given an opportunity to 25 share their experience and/or their views.
131 In other cases, it will consist of a round 2 table of invited experts and/or parties who will be asked 3 to comment on the paper. Parties will be invited to 4 participate in a consultation are appropriate, but 5 participation, of course, optional. Clearly, not every 6 party is interested in every topic nor are they expected 7 to be. 8 Participation funding for the 9 consultations may be available for parties who need it, 10 but Counsel fees are not. 11 In addition to the Inquiry's research and 12 consultations, I have recommended funding for some 13 parties to prepare its research documents or papers or to 14 conduct consultations of their own. 15 Parties were not precluded from seeking 16 funding for a research project if an issue was also 17 identified in the Inquiry's research and consultation 18 plan. 19 Different approaches and perspectives on 20 an issue are sometimes necessary and will assist in 21 developing the recommendations. It's important to 22 remember as the papers are completed and shared that the 23 views expressed in the papers are those of the authors 24 and not necessarily those of the Commission or the 25 Commissioner.
141 The purpose of the papers is to identify 2 and discuss the major historical legal policy and 3 operational issues related to avoiding violence in 4 similar circumstances. 5 The papers are expected to provide 6 background and context as well as to inform the 7 recommendations that will be included in the final 8 report. I am not bound by any of the views of 9 perspectives in the papers in preparing the final report. 10 Now, some will view the research and 11 general policy agendas too general or broad, and others 12 will consider it too narrow. In my view, that's a 13 healthy reflection of the various perspectives of the 14 different interests that are represented at this Inquiry. 15 As always I welcome your comments or 16 suggestions regarding any aspect of the Commission's work 17 or plans. In the past I've asked you to bring your views 18 to our lead counsel Mr. Derry Millar and, of course, I 19 still encourage you to do that. 20 In addition, I now invite you to direct 21 any questions or comments you may have regarding Part 2 22 of the Inquiry to Mr. Nye Thomas, our Director of Policy 23 and Research. 24 That's it. Thank you. 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Commissioner, we have
151 Carl Tolsma on the stand. And I know that I had closed 2 my examination last day, but some further documents have 3 come to our attention and I request permission to reopen 4 the examination prior to the commencement of the cross- 5 examinations. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 7 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 8 9 CARL OTTO TOLSMA, Resumed 10 11 CONTINUED EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SUSAN VELLA. 12 Q: Mr. Tolsma, you spoke to us last day 13 concerning the efforts by the Stoney Point First Nation 14 Number 43, to negotiate via the Kettle Point Band Council 15 with the Federal Government and to govern the community. 16 And some documents have come to our attention which may 17 assist in refreshing your memory with respect to some 18 further particulars of that time period. 19 And the time period I'm addressing 20 particularly is 1993 through 1994. And the first 21 document I'd like you to have a look, and I believe you 22 have a copy in front of you, it's a document, it's 23 Inquiry Document Number 900-0014 and it's a series of 24 documents dated May 6th, 1993 to the Forest Ontario 25 Provincial Police.
161 And there appears to be your signature at 2 the bottom of the page as Chief Carl Otto George; is that 3 your signature? 4 A: Yes, it is. 5 Q: And I wonder if we might make that 6 the next exhibit. It's a document which is six (6) pages 7 in total with the cover letter or notice dated May 6th, 8 1993 from Stoney Point First Nation Number 43. 9 And you talked earlier about giving notice 10 to the Forest Detachment about your intention to go into 11 what was then the army camp, Camp Ipperwash, and is this 12 a copy of that notice which you provided with -- to the 13 Ontario Provincial Police? 14 A: Yes it is. 15 Q: And I note that the third page of 16 this document is a -- it looks like a press release 17 perhaps, May 6th, 1993. Again it appears to be a 18 signature, your signature as Chief Carl Otto George; is 19 that your signature on the third page. 20 A: Yes, it is. 21 Q: All right. And what this notice is, 22 advising the public is that is the following, this notice 23 is the only comment, quote: 24 "The Stoney Point First Nations people 25 wish to address until all of our people
171 have had time to hear our position. 2 1. We have come home in the name of 3 our people, tradition and custom. 4 2. We are not claiming the Stoney 5 Point Reserve Number 43 in the name of 6 only those uprooted, but also in the 7 right of the first and second and third 8 generation children whose parents and 9 grandparents have been victimized by 10 the taking of their lands, farms in 11 1942. 12 3. We faxed the various ministers 13 responsible for the great injustice our 14 peoples have suffered and are awaiting 15 communications with them in our 16 reoccupation. 17 4. We have done this legally. 18 5. A copy of "The Law Protecting our 19 Lands and our Identity" will be issued 20 on Monday, May 10th, 1993. 21 6. We request all outside First 22 Nations "To stay away from our legal 23 takeover that misrepresentation or 24 civil disobedience may not occur". 25 7. We will advise the public in the
181 immediate area of our actions subject 2 to a formal address on Monday, May 3 10th, 1993 after other landowners from 4 Stoney Point Number 43 have had a 5 chance to meet with our council and 6 legal representatives. 7 8. We are video recording our actions 8 and taking these precautions to ensure 9 accurate attempts are made to all 10 concerned and for the safety of all 11 parties. 12 9. We are not hindering the elected 13 Kettle Point Council or people from 14 joining us, "but they do not represent 15 us in any way, shape or form." 16 Now, did that, in fact, represent the 17 position of the people whom you represented in May of 18 1993 -- these positions? 19 A: It -- well, we were trying to 20 represent the people that were uprooted. 21 Q: All right. And you indicated that 22 there was a law attached. Now, the next three (3) pages 23 appear to be three (3) pages of a proclamation, it's a 24 little out of order but, in any event, referencing an act 25 for the protection of the Indians in Upper Canada from
191 imposition and the property occupied or enjoyed by them 2 from trespass and injury. 3 This is a proclamation that was issued by 4 the -- under the protection of Indians Act -- sorry, the 5 Indian Protection Act and I note that there is a segment 6 on the first page of that, which references a piece of 7 land which was to be: 8 "Protected pursuant to this legislation 9 starting at Kettle Point in the said 10 township and county, bounded on the 11 north and west by Lake Huron and on the 12 south and east by the lake road lots 13 and 18th and 19th concessions of the 14 said township of Bosanquet reserved for 15 the occupation of the Chippewa Indians, 16 also one (1) other piece or parcel of 17 land as follows being near the mouth of 18 the River Aux Sable and the said 19 township of Bosanquet and county 20 aforesaid and bounded on the northwest 21 by Lake Huron and on the southeast, 22 northeast and northwest -- sorry, 23 southwest, excuse me, -- by the lake 24 road lots and 18th and 19th concessions 25 of the said township of Bosanquet."
201 Now, what did this property description 2 mean to you or refer to you when you issued it with your 3 May 6th, 1993 notice? 4 A: Well, the land that they give the 5 people was -- originally in the beginning, it was bigger 6 than it is right now and slowly it was taken away, so all 7 that really was left was the area where Camp Ipperwash 8 was sitting on. 9 And we were just trying to use the law 10 that they -- they set out for us because the Government 11 said, I forget what paper it is, that the native people 12 could own -- have their own land and they would not be 13 bothered as long as the wind blows, the water runs, and 14 the grass grows. 15 To me, this meant forever. I wish I would 16 have brought that paper with me, but I couldn't find it. 17 But what they say in that -- this is -- 18 what's given to the native people, so why -- why would 19 they want to, you know, take it back and -- because they 20 kept taking land and more land and more land and sooner 21 or later somebody has to fight for what -- what is 22 theirs. So, we're just using it. We just -- at that 23 time, we just used their own laws to through back in 24 their face. That's... 25 Q: And did this -- this property
211 description, did that -- did you understand that property 2 description to include what was then the Camp Ipperwash 3 lands? 4 A: Just the Camp Ipperwash land, yes. 5 Q: And did you understand this property 6 to also include Ipperwash Provincial Park? 7 A: It was supposed to, yes. 8 Q: All right. Thank you. This refers - 9 - the notice refers to a meeting that was supposed to 10 happen on May the 10th, 1993. 11 Do you recall there being any such meeting 12 to address these issues in public? 13 A: There probably was. I just can't 14 remember exactly because there was so many meetings. 15 Q: All right. And the notice also 16 indicates that -- that various ministers responsible were 17 -- were being communicated with by members of your group 18 or on behalf of the Stoney Point First Nation Number 43 19 in relation to this claim. 20 Is that something that you -- you can 21 confirm? 22 A: Well, we sent letters to all of them, 23 yes. 24 Q: Did you receive responses? 25 A: We probably did, because usually do.
221 Q: And was it important to you that 2 there were laws in place in the Canadian legal system 3 that supported, in your view, supported your claim? 4 A: Oh yes. 5 Q: Why -- why is that important to you? 6 A: Well, it just proves right there that 7 they -- this land was set aside for us and then they took 8 it when the war was on, and they said they were supposed 9 to give it back and when they never, then it just proves 10 right there that there was laws in place for this land 11 for the people to live on and they wouldn't give it back, 12 so they're breaking their own laws. 13 Q: And when you gave notice of these 14 actions or your intended occupation to the Ontario 15 Provincial Police, did they raise with you any safety 16 related concerns or any concerns with respect to 17 protection of the public? 18 A: Just as long we didn't block the 19 highways or break any kind of a law. They -- they 20 usually told us what the laws were and they didn't care 21 what we done as long as we didn't break the law, that's 22 all. 23 Q: All right, did they give -- did they 24 advise you that this action would be considered by them 25 to be breaking the law?
231 2 (BRIEF PAUSE) 3 4 A: I don't think so. 5 Q: All right. Now, the next document I 6 want to draw your attention to... 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Before we move on, 11 let's make that document, please, the next exhibit. 12 THE REGISTRAR: 195. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 195. 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: And that's the full six 15 (6) page document. 16 17 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-195: Document No. 9000014 May 18 06/93, letter of Authority to 19 the OPP Forest Detachment 20 from Stoney Point No. 43 21 First Nation signed by Carl. 22 O. George Chief and Maynard 23 T. George, councillor, Re: 24 Occupation of traditional 25 homes.
241 2 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 3 Q: And the next document is a letter 4 dated June 1st, 1993 from Stoney Point First Nation 5 Number 43, attention Mr. Barry Redmond, I believe it is, 6 social and family benefits in Sarnia. 7 Do you have that letter there? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And there appears to be a signature 10 at the bottom of that page, under Chief Carl Otto George; 11 is that your signature? 12 A: Yes, it is. 13 Q: I'd like to make that the next 14 exhibit, please. 15 THE REGISTRAR: P-196. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 196. 17 18 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-196: Document No. 90000483, June 19 01/'93 from Stoney Point No. 20 43 First Nation signed by 21 Carl. O. George, Chief and 22 Maynard T. George, 23 councillor, To Mr. Barry 24 Redmond, Social and Family 25 Benefits, Sarnia, re: Listing
251 of Individuals and families 2 needing welfare assistance at 3 the Stoney Point First Nation 4 Reserve No. 43. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: Now, in this letter there appears to 8 be expressed a concern with respect to the provision of 9 social assistance to the people who were occupying Camp - 10 - part of Camp Ipperwash. 11 Do you recall that -- that issue? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Can you tell the Commission what gave 14 rise to the concern and how you dealt with it? 15 A: Well, in the beginning, a lot of 16 people were out of work and in need of assistance to 17 live, because they -- they had their children there. 18 And in the beginning, Social Assistance on 19 Kettle Point wouldn't deal with them and so they had to 20 go -- we had to ask, like, the head office in Wyoming. 21 And the few people got assistance there and after a while 22 the social service on Kettle Point finally started to 23 help. 24 Q: And what was the result of that 25 effort?
261 A: Well, the few people that needed 2 assistance, they -- they got their assistance after a 3 while. 4 Q: All right. And I note in this letter 5 that you indicate, I'll quote from it: 6 "Further we have legally seized our 7 lands and we are working with the 8 Ontario Provincial Police as well as 9 the RCMP to ensure a legitimacy is 10 enforced." 11 And can you tell us, did you have any 12 communications or involvement with the RCMP in '93 13 concerning this occupation? 14 A: Well, I believe I talked to one (1) 15 from the RCMP. I can't remember his name, but I'm -- I 16 can just vaguely remember speaking to a -- a person from 17 the RCMP. 18 Q: On -- on an isolated occasion? I'm 19 trying to -- 20 A: Maybe -- maybe once or twice. 21 Q: All right. Was that extent of the -- 22 your involvement with the RCMP? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And what was the point of that 25 communication?
271 A: Well, more or less just to -- like, 2 he just wanted to know what we were doing and what we 3 were up to and how long we -- we planned to be there and 4 stuff like that. 5 Q: All right. Now, the -- this letter 6 also refers to a listing of individuals and you refer to, 7 the bottom of the page, five hundred and seventy-four 8 (574) citizens listings of which only eight (8) families 9 need help and had you or someone on your behalf assembled 10 a list of whom you understand -- stood to be proper 11 residents, if you will, to -- or at least entitled to 12 residency at the Aazhoodena territory? 13 A: Maynard T. George is the one that put 14 it together. 15 Q: All right. And just for the record, 16 the last exhibit is Inquiry Number 900483 and I'd like 17 now to move to Inquiry Document Number 9000553. It's 18 entitled, Preliminary Draft Stoney Point Band Membership 19 List, date July 2, 1992. 20 Do you have that document in front of you? 21 A: Yes, I do. 22 Q: And can you tell me, is this the -- 23 the membership list that was attached to the June 1st, 24 '93 letter? 25 A: Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is, yes.
281 Q: And just tell us, in your own words, 2 what this membership list reflects? 3 A: Well, these names here are the heirs 4 and -- that, you know, more or less had a claim to -- to 5 Stoney Point. 6 Q: All right. Can you give us a sense 7 as to what criteria were used or how it was that the, you 8 know, the names were found to be appropriately put on 9 this list? 10 A: Well, Kettle Point has a -- a list 11 and probably -- well, I don't know how Maynard put it 12 together, but more or less he probably used the same list 13 that Kettle Point had. 14 Q: So, this was drawn from the Kettle 15 and Stoney Point Band list? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: But with the criteria that these were 18 errors in your view to entitlement at Aazhoodena? 19 A: Well as far as I can tell this is the 20 same thing of everybody. 21 Q: All right. When you say "everybody"- 22 A: Well, like -- 23 Q: Every -- 24 A: I mean, like every -- everyone that's 25 on the Band list at Kettle and Stoney Point.
291 Q: So, the -- even though it says, 2 Stoney Point First Nations Membership List, you believe 3 that included people from the Kettle Point -- continue. 4 A: Well, just by reading it real 5 quickly, is -- it's pretty -- pretty well the same that 6 the Kettle and Stoney Point has. 7 Q: All right. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: There's a few -- there's quite a few 12 names that's left off of here . 13 Q: All right. And perhaps you can just 14 clarify, then, this document -- and I just want to be 15 clear on this -- this document's entitled, Stoney Point 16 First Nations Membership List. 17 So, in your view, is it the Stoney Point 18 First Nations membership list or is it, in fact, a 19 combination of Kettle and Stoney Point members? 20 A: It's a combination. 21 Q: All right. Thank you. Make this the 22 next exhibit, please? 23 THE REGISTRAR: P-197. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-197. 25
301 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-197: Document No. 9000553, July 2 02/'92 preliminary draft 3 Stoney Point Band Membership 4 List. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: Now, did you have any dealings with - 8 - with Ron George in relation to attempts at negotiations 9 with the Federal Government and Kettle Point concerning 10 the disposition of the Camp Ipperwash lands? 11 A: Yes, I did. 12 Q: And what capacity did Ron George act? 13 A: Well, he -- he advised us quite a bit 14 of different issues. 15 Q: All right. And I see that the next 16 letter I'd like you to look at is a letter dated 17 September 21, 1993 and it appears to be from Ronald C. 18 George, to Kettle Point First Nation, attention Chief Tom 19 Bressette and it's on his law office letterhead. 20 Now, did you -- did the Stoney Point 21 Nation retain him as a lawyer, in fact? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: I don't -- I don't think so. I think
311 he just offered to give his assistance. 2 Q: All right. And in this letter it 3 indicates as follows: 4 "On Friday September 17, 1993 I met 5 with Chief Carl George and Don Goodwin 6 of E.E. Hobbs (phonetics) and 7 Associates for the purpose of reviewing 8 the matter of the status of the above- 9 noted land claim." 10 Now, can you tell me who Don Goodman -- 11 Goodwin was and what his capacity was there? 12 A: They were like a outfit that went 13 through and looked for documents, but when they were with 14 us, they -- they went to Kettle Point and they -- they 15 done all their records and they put them in order and 16 they photocopied a lot of stuff and when they were trying 17 to help us there, too, all they done was give us the same 18 thing that Kettle Point had. 19 Q: Were they researchers, historical 20 researchers? 21 A: Well, yeah, they were like 22 researchers, yes. 23 Q: Okay. 24 A: But, they didn't come up with 25 anything new. All they done was photocopy whatever
321 Kettle Point had. 2 Q: All right. 3 A: And that was the extent of that. 4 Q: And I understand that at this time, 5 there was the beginnings of an agreement between Stoney 6 Point and Kettle Point for Stoney Point to have two (2) 7 members placed onto a negotiation team in relation to the 8 disposition of the Camp Ipperwash lands; is that right? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And you spoke of this last day and 11 you were one of those members; is that right? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And so in light of the date of this 14 letter, does that assist you as to when, approximately, 15 this negotiation team was assembled? 16 A: It had to be -- well, it was 17 assembled before -- a little before this letter was 18 wrote, but I can't remember exact -- you know, a month 19 and... 20 Q: Okay. So, in or around the fall -- 21 early fall of '93? 22 A: As far as I can remember, yeah. 23 Q: And how long did you remain a member 24 of that negotiating team? 25 A: I don't know, maybe about a year.
331 Q: And what gave rise to your leaving 2 that negotiation team? 3 A: I -- well, there was one (1) person 4 on there that was just giving anybody that was from Camp 5 Ipperwash there at -- was asked to come on -- he's just 6 more or less giving them a hard time. 7 And we made it clear that we were -- 8 didn't want to be put on this negotiating team for -- to 9 argue amongst ourself, but in the end we just said, well, 10 we don't want no more part of it. 11 Some stayed; like I didn't. I just -- I 12 didn't feel like arguing. 13 Q: All right. So, in your view, at 14 least your experience on a negotiation team was not a 15 very productive one; is that fair? 16 A: Well, when we were talking to the 17 Government, it was but, like, we made a lot of headway 18 and brought a lot of things out but when we met, you 19 know, with -- amongst ourselves and I was the one that 20 was doing a lot of arguing and a lot of accusations were 21 thrown at me. 22 So I figured it was in best interest of 23 the negotiating team that I wasn't on there no more, 24 because I'd rather see it start moving ahead than -- more 25 or less we weren't moving anywhere because the same
341 subject was brought up over and over again. And like I 2 was just -- best that I left. 3 Q: And what was the major stumbling 4 block in your view to progress? 5 A: Well, to talk with the Government and 6 bring the issues out about the land and that the land was 7 brought -- given to us and they took it with the War 8 Measure Act and they were supposed to give it back right 9 after the war. 10 And it still wasn't so, you know, the -- 11 the negotiator at that time for the Government, he stood 12 understood all this stuff but then again he made very 13 excuse there was to stall it. But they knew what we 14 wanted and there -- you know, at that time there was no 15 turning back at that time. 16 It was all starting to go forward and no 17 matter how long it took. So, I -- I think we done pretty 18 good except for when I was on the negotiating team and we 19 talked amongst ourselves. 20 Q: Can you tell me the name of the 21 federal Government negotiator? 22 A: Not the first one I can't because I 23 don't remember his name. 24 Q: Okay. 25 A: But, he just wouldn't -- he promised
351 everything and give nothing. 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: So, we agreed that get rid of him and 4 get somebody else in there that would talk with us. 5 Q: All right. Fair enough. And -- and 6 you've indicated earlier that when you talked amongst 7 yourselves I -- I take it that you mean between Kettle 8 and Stoney Point when you were talking amongst 9 yourselves? 10 A: The people -- like the ones that were 11 on the negotiating team. 12 Q: Okay. And you said that there were a 13 lot of arguing going and that you were doing a lot of the 14 arguing, what was it that you were arguing over? 15 A: Well, there was one (1) person on the 16 negotiating team that was a head more or less that 17 chaired it and he just didn't like our ideas, ideas that 18 we brought forward and he just kept saying that these are 19 here because the Council agreed to it because we're not - 20 - you're not here because I want you here. So, it was 21 stuff like that. 22 Q: And who was this person that you're 23 referring to? 24 A: Norm Shelano (phonetic). 25 Q: Okay. Was he the -- the chief at
361 Kettle and Stony Point Band? 2 A: He was at one time, yes. 3 Q: I would like to make that letter the 4 next exhibit please. 5 THE REGISTRAR: P-198. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-198. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-198: Document No. 9000038 9 September 21, 1993 letter 10 from Ronald C. George, Law 11 Office to Kettle Point First 12 Nation, Attention Chief Tom 13 Bressette re Stoney Point 14 land claim. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 17 Q: Now, did you have any professional 18 dealings in 1993 with -- with Anthony Ross, a lawyer who 19 -- who's here at the Hearing? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And did -- your First Nation -- did 22 the Stoney Point First Nation Number 43 hire Mr. Ross as 23 your lawyer, as the First Nation's lawyer? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: All right. Thank you.
371 Now you indicated that there was some 2 communications with -- with certain politicians. And I 3 would like you to look at a letter dated December 10, 4 1993. It's Inquiry Document Number 90000-64. It's a 5 letter from Rose Marie Ur MP for Lambton Middlesex to 6 Chief Carl O. George. 7 Do you have that letter in front of you? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And it refers -- firstly, did you 10 receive this letter in or around December of '93? 11 A: I probably -- probably did but I -- I 12 just don't recognize it right now. 13 Q: All right. Well, were you at that 14 time living at -- at least as a mail address, R.R. No. 2, 15 Ravens Wood, General Delivery in Forest? 16 A: That's where I was getting my mail, 17 yea. 18 Q: Okay. I would like to make that the 19 next exhibit please. 20 THE REGISTRAR: P-199. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-199: Document No. 9000064, 23 December 10/'93 Letter from 24 Rose Marie Ur, MP Lambton 25 Middlesex to Chief Carl O.
381 George re: Land Settlement 2 Dispute between Camp 3 Ipperwash and Stoney Point 4 Reserve. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: This refers to a meeting with Maynard 8 George. I assume that's Maynard T. George of the Stoney 9 Point Reserve on Thursday, December 9th, 1993 in Ottawa 10 in which he expressed his concerns regarding the land 11 settlement dispute between Camp Ipperwash and Stoney 12 Point Reserve. 13 And I'm just -- did -- do you recall 14 whether or not Mr. George attended in Ottawa in or around 15 that time period to review this issue with the Federal 16 politicians? 17 A: Well, he probably did, he took off to 18 Ottawa quite often. 19 Q: Well, is this part of the -- the 20 strategy of your First Nation to communicate with members 21 of the Federal Government to put your case before them, 22 so to speak? 23 A: Well, it was originally what we 24 intended, but then again Maynard T., he just, around 25 about that time he was just starting to do a lot of
391 things on his own without anybody -- telling anybody. 2 Q: All right. Well, let's speak to the 3 -- the First Nations strategy, then, as far as you can 4 speak to it. 5 Was it part of your First Nations' 6 strategy? 7 A: It was part of it, yes. 8 Q: All right. And so were there 9 communications on behalf of the First Nation with Federal 10 ministers and Governmental people? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And what -- what was the result of 13 these various conversations and communications with the 14 Federal Government politicians and Government people? 15 A: Well, at that time they understood 16 and they said that they -- more or less what they were 17 trying to say was they have to deal with the Kettle and 18 Stoney Point Council. 19 Q: All right. And so in other words, 20 they would only negotiate with the official Indian Act 21 band, is that right? 22 A: That's right. 23 Q: And was that problematic from your 24 perspective? 25 A: No, that's what I wanted to see
401 happen. 2 Q: All right. Is that providing that 3 you had representation? 4 A: Well, it didn't matter if I had 5 representation or not at -- with the Kettle Point 6 Council. 7 Q: Okay. 8 A: Like, if you're referring to Tony 9 Ross, like, the people that was there, like, at -- on 10 Stoney Point -- 11 Q: Well, let me just caution you for one 12 (1) minute. If Mr. Ross was the First Nations' lawyer at 13 this time period, then you need not go into any 14 communications that he had with you or -- or members of 15 the First Nation because of -- 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: -- solicitor/client privilege. If 18 you do go into those communications, you'll waive that 19 privilege. 20 And so you -- and -- and well, in any 21 event -- you may not wish to address the communications 22 with him or about -- from him. 23 A: Okay. No, I don't. 24 Q: All right. Thank you. 25
411 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: All right. Now, what was the -- were 4 you satisfied with the -- the progress of the 5 negotiations that the Kettle and Stoney Point Band were 6 having with the Federal Government in relation to the 7 disposition of the Camp Ipperwash lands at the end of the 8 day? 9 A: I was satisfied, yes, but it was just 10 that they were -- the thing I wanted to see was, they 11 started to talk and that was one (1) of the things I -- I 12 wanted to see, but it's the way the negotiators for the 13 Government was -- what they were doing. They were -- 14 they were stalling and it took thirteen (13) years before 15 they would even give -- give an inch. 16 Q: Fourteen (14) years from when? 17 A: Well, thirteen (13) years from the 18 time I was on there. 19 Q: Okay. And in your view, did the -- 20 your perception that the Government was stalling and 21 refusing to -- well, stalling on -- on these talks, did 22 that affect your credibility amongst the Stoney Point 23 group? 24 A: It probably did, because I got a lot 25 of arguing, people mad at me because they said things
421 weren't going smoothly and -- but they just didn't 2 understand how things operate. 3 Q: All right. Now, you indicated that 4 you didn't have any difficulty with the Federal 5 Government's position that they would only negotiate with 6 the Indian Act band, but were -- was the Stoney Point 7 First Nation at the same time seeking to -- to gain 8 autonomy in relation to the provision of services, for 9 example, within the community from the Indian Act band? 10 A: The Kettle Point? 11 Q: Yes. Were you -- 12 A: Probably were, yeah. 13 Q: And I wonder if you would look at the 14 letter dated January 28, 1994. It's Inquiry Document 15 Number 9000069. It's a letter from members -- it would 16 appear from the Chief and council of Stoney Point First 17 Nation to Mr. Richard Jaques (phonetic), Ontario Regional 18 Director, Medical Services Branch. 19 And the second paragraph indicates as 20 follows: 21 "We hereby inform you that as of the 22 date of this correspondence, your 23 Ministry is on notice to cease any 24 further negotiations concerning the 25 health services interest of the Stoney
431 Point First Nation and its membership 2 thereof. 3 We further demand that any and all 4 future concerns of the health services 5 of the Stoney Point peoples must be 6 directed to the attention of and 7 resulting full participation in 8 negotiations of the chief and Council 9 of the members of the Stoney Point 10 First Nation Number 43." 11 And on the second page, is that your 12 signature under Carl George, Chief? 13 A: Yes, it is. 14 Q: And I see that it was copied to the 15 Minister of Health and Welfare, Canada and to the 16 Honourable John Chretien, Prime Minister. 17 Now, can you just tell me what gave rise 18 to this letter? 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 A: I'm just trying to remember, but... 23 Q: You might look at the first 24 paragraph. It might refresh your memory. 25
441 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 A: I think what -- like Maynard T. put 4 this letter together and I think what had in mind is 5 trying to get more or less some help and to -- I guess 6 the main thing was to get -- to know that we were there. 7 Q: In January of '94, this is your -- 8 the first winter season that -- that the Stoney Point 9 people occupied Camp Ipperwash, right? 10 A: Yeah, yes. 11 Q: And maybe you could just tell us, 12 what was the state of affairs in terms of running water, 13 hydro, services at -- to the people who were occupying? 14 A: Well, we didn't have any running 15 water. It was -- it was cold, very cold and the people 16 had -- well, they had a pretty rough time. 17 We just had wood stoves to keep warm with. 18 Like I said, at that time I think the -- well, they were 19 asking for assistance, social service, but I think Kettle 20 Point kicked in about that time for some of them. 21 Like everybody wasn't on it. It was only 22 a very few with children and the main thing was with the 23 people with the children that's the ones that we were 24 trying to more or less take care of first. 25 Q: Hmm hmm.
451 A: And -- but still, even until they had 2 assista -- it was still very hard for them. 3 Q: Did -- did your community also 4 receive assistance from the local community or from 5 people outside of the community, outside the aboriginal 6 community? 7 A: From outside the community, yes. 8 Q: Can you tell us a little bit about 9 that? 10 A: Well, like, when we went to Detroit, 11 there was Maynard T., Robert George, Nobby (phonetic), 12 myself and I think it was Rose Manning. 13 We went to a native centre there to speak 14 and just more or less to educate people out there and 15 after we were finished then they -- they already had like 16 clothing put together, they had dried foods put together 17 and they sent that back when we came back. 18 Q: And did you also -- were you -- was 19 your community in need of building materials? 20 A: Yes. We went to the unions I think 21 CAW, I believe it was, and they set up -- they done some 22 fund raising and they set up, like, aa account in a 23 lumber store and -- Watford I believe and I think there 24 was maybe six (6) people. There was enough money that 25 they raised to build like six (6) little shacks. Enough
461 to get through the winter with. 2 Q: Okay. I would like to make that last 3 letter dated January 28, 1994 the next exhibit please. 4 THE REGISTRAR: P-200. 5 6 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-200: Document No. 9000069, January 7 28/'94 Letter from Stoney 8 Point No. 43 First Nation To 9 Mr. Richard Jock, Ontario 10 Regional Direction, Medical 11 Services Branch, Health & 12 Welfare Canada re: 13 Proposed pre-transfer and 14 transfer of health services 15 Stoney Point First Nation 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 18 Q: Now, there's a letter in front of you 19 that's dated May 3rd, 1994. It's addressed to the 20 Honourable Ronald A. Irwin, Minister of Indian Affairs 21 Canada from Ross, Barrett and Scott. 22 You've already indicated that Mr. Ross was 23 your lawyer, at least the First Nations' lawyer in this 24 regard? 25
471 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: The front page is a faxed sheet dated 4 May 3, 1994, that might help. 5 A: May 25th? 6 Q: May 3rd. 7 A: 3rd. Okay. I got it here. 8 Q: All right. Just turn the second 9 page. That's a letter -- perhaps you could just take a 10 moment to review it but it says, and essentially the 11 following: 12 "For approximately one (1) year Members 13 of the Chippewa and Kettle and Stoney 14 Point who have now identified 15 themselves as a Stoney Point First 16 Nation Number 43, have been seeking my 17 counsel primarily with respect to the 18 return of the lands which were taken by 19 Canada for the creation of Camp 20 Ipperwash back in 1943. 21 I have been presented with petitions 22 signed by one thirteen (113) Band 23 Members of which one oh four (104) have 24 Band numbers and the other nine (9) 25 although they are part of the Stoney
481 Point First Nation do not have Band 2 numbers. 3 The document preamble to in petition 4 speaks for itself. And on behalf of 5 all signatories I ask that this 6 document be given urgent and serious 7 consideration recognizing that this 8 matter relates to the Ontario region, I 9 am taking the liberty of forwarding 10 copies of this letter and the document 11 book to Audrey Doerr Regional Director 12 General. 13 I trust that you will find it 14 convenient to get back to me in -- in 15 the not too distant future." 16 Now, was this something which was part of 17 the First Nation's strategy to get this matter before 18 Ottawa? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And do you recall was there any 21 response from the Honourable Ronald Irwin or anyone on 22 his behalf to this letter? 23 A: There probably was because every time 24 we wrote a letter we usually got a response back. 25 Q: And can you recall -- was it -- what
491 type of a response you received? 2 A: Usually it was just a very -- 3 something very short. I can't recall exactly what the 4 response was but usually we did get a response back what 5 was usually, like I said, very -- something short like 6 one paragraph explaining, like, the Minister was made 7 aware of this and it was probably done by his secretary 8 or something like that. 9 Q: All right. And as a result of these 10 efforts then, was there any meaningful movement by Canada 11 to address the issues raised by this letter? 12 A: Not -- not that I could tell at that 13 time. 14 Q: All right. I would like to make that 15 the next exhibit please. 16 THE REGISTRAR: P-201. 17 18 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-201: Letter dated May 3rd, 1994 19 addressed to the Honourable 20 Ronald A. Irwin, Minister of 21 Indian Affairs Canada from 22 Ross, Barrett and Scott. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 25 Q: Now, I would like to go next to a
501 letter dated August 3rd, 1994 so some four (4) months or 2 so after this May 3rd letter. And it's a letter to the 3 Honourable Ronald A. Irwin, Minister of Indian Affairs 4 and Northern Developments, from Chief Carl George. 5 And I wonder if you could just have a look 6 at that letter and do you recall sending this letter to 7 Ronald Irwin and also to the Prime Minister and the 8 Minister of Defence? 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 A: Again, I'd just have to say I 13 probably did, but I just -- a lot of these letters, I 14 don't recognize any more because I probably did. 15 Q: All right. And what was the purpose 16 of you writing as Chief of Stoney Point First Nations to 17 the Minister of Indian Affairs? 18 A: What was the meaning? 19 Q: Yes, why -- what was the meaning? 20 A: Well, more or less to get their 21 attention. And even if I was -- wasn't the -- the real 22 chief, I know I signed a lot of things as chief, but more 23 or less to me that was just like a spokesman, but the 24 point was to get their attention and to just make them 25 understand what was going on and more or less to get
511 dealing with the problems. 2 Q: All right. 3 A: That was my whole intention of 4 everything. 5 Q: And in this letter, you express some 6 critical sentiments with respect to the Canadian 7 Government and its handling of -- of aboriginal issues? 8 A: Yeah, I probably did. 9 Q: I'd like to make this the next 10 exhibit, please? 11 THE REGISTRAR: P-202. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-202: Document No. 9000124, August 14 3rd, 1994, from Chief Carl 15 George, Stoney Point No. 43 16 to Hon. Ronald A. Irwin, 17 Minister of Indian Affairs 18 & Northern Developments re: 19 Stoney Point First Nations 20 No. 43 return of Land. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 23 Q: I'd like you next to look at a letter 24 from the Minister of National Defence, the Honourable 25 D.M. Collenette to Mr. Carl George and it's -- doesn't
521 appar to be dated, but there's a handwritten date of 2 September 21, 1994 so a month and a bit after you sent 3 your August 3rd letter. 4 And this -- firstly, do you recall likely 5 receiving this letter from the Minister of National 6 Defence? 7 A: Well, I probably did but I can't -- 8 like I say, I can't recall a lot of these things. There 9 was many letters that I never really paid attention to a 10 lot of them. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: Like, the people -- I just -- when we 13 had our meetings, they were read to the people and more 14 or less put aside to be on file. 15 Q: And -- and well let's make this the 16 next exhibit, please. 17 THE REGISTRAR: P-203. 18 19 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-203: Document No. 9000123, Sept 20 21/'94 letter from Hon. D.M. 21 Collenette, Minister of 22 National Defense to Mr. Carl 23 George re Appropriation of 24 Stoney Point Reserve 25
531 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 2 Q: And this letter is written in 3 response to your August 3rd, 1994 letter. It indicates 4 that you also sent it to Ron Irwin and there the Minister 5 of National Defence appears to set out the response, at 6 least of his department, to the matters you raise in your 7 August 3rd letter concerning the appropriation of the 8 Stoney Point reserve. 9 A: Hmm hmm. 10 Q: And it indicates their position that: 11 "These individuals were compensated for 12 any improvements they made to the land, 13 and case law is established that when 14 the reserve lands are appropriated, 15 sold, otherwise -- or otherwise 16 disposed of, any compensation paid with 17 respect to the value of the underlying 18 land accrues to the Band and not to the 19 individual members of the Band who are 20 residing on the land in question." 21 Now, it also says: 22 "However, while the interests of 23 locatees or other occupiers are 24 subordinate to that of the Band, such 25 persons will have a right to be
541 compensated for any improvements they 2 made to the land. 3 The Kettle and Stoney Point Band as a 4 whole was further compensated with 5 respect to the value of the underlying 6 land." 7 It then goes to indicate that: 8 "The Kettle and Stony Point Band was, 9 and is a Band within the meaning of the 10 Indian Act and is recognized as such by 11 the Government of Canada and while the 12 Indian Act is -- contain provisions 13 which allow the Band members to affect 14 a Band split, I'm not aware of any such 15 action having been taken in the case of 16 the Kettle and Stoney Point Band. In 17 fact, the entity referred to in your 18 letter as a Stoney Point First Nation 19 Number 43 is not a legal [sorry] 20 recognized Band." 21 It also says that: 22 "The government of Canada has a legal 23 obligation pursuant to the 1981 Order 24 in Council to return Camp Ipperwash to 25 the Kettle and Stoney Point Band for
551 its use and benefit as a further 2 addition to their reserve when it is no 3 longer required for military purposes. 4 A joint environmental assessment of the 5 Camp Ipperwash property will be 6 conducted with the Kettle and Stoney 7 Point Band prior to the negotiations on 8 the transfer of lands from the 9 Department of the National Defence to 10 the Band, hence I urge you to 11 communicate your views to the Band 12 Council and Chief Bressette to -- and 13 ensure that those views are reflected 14 in these negotiations." 15 Now, did that set out a satisfactory 16 response to the issues you had been raising on behalf of 17 the Stoney Point First Nation? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And in your view was the -- the 20 matters or the representations made by the National -- 21 Minister of National Defence ultimately carried through? 22 A: Well, with the -- what they -- what 23 National Defence is saying in here, I already knew what 24 they would say and it was true that we weren't a 25 recognized band because we couldn't be.
561 To -- when they were saying that they 2 would -- Kettle and Stoney Point was dealt with whenever, 3 that part there -- it's an easy way out for them because 4 I think quite a few years ago back in, oh geez, I think 5 it was '80 or before that, they got a -- a settlement for 6 what reason, for the -- for the land and I think that's 7 what they were more or less hitting on. 8 Q: The $2.5 million settlement? 9 A: The 2.5 million, yes. 10 Q: All right. 11 A: But that wasn't a -- a settlement for 12 everything, that was -- I think it had to do something 13 with the back rent. 14 Q: Now, it indicates here that the 15 Government of Canada would return the reserve when it -- 16 when it -- when the Camp Ipperwash was no longer required 17 for military purposes. Now, in your view, as of 1994, 18 was Camp Ipperwash still required for military purposes? 19 A: No, because the -- the Military 20 wasn't there. It was just cadets. It was just training 21 of cadets. 22 And, like, after the war they said they 23 were going to give it back, but in here they say that for 24 military purposes -- the only military purpose I seen 25 there -- when I worked there was on weekends, like when
571 the RCRs would come in and do training or the OPPs would 2 train their dogs, but mainly it was just summer time. It 3 was open only in the summer time for the cadets -- the 4 training of the cadets. 5 Q: And so in your view then, as of 1994, 6 what was the holdup with respect to returning the land? 7 A: I -- well, the Military, as far as I 8 can understand, they just wanted to hang onto the land 9 and they give every excuse there was so they wouldn't 10 have to give it up right away. Like, they -- in here 11 they say for military purposes, but again they didn't 12 have any military exercising there. 13 Q: And how did that sit with the people 14 at Stoney Point? 15 A: Well, they -- they felt the same way. 16 Like, they wanted to see the land returned and everybody 17 knew that there was no Military there for years. Even 18 Kettle and Stoney Point Council, like, we all grew up 19 knowing this and everybody understood the same -- the 20 same thing, like, they're going to stall as much as they 21 can. They -- they promised to give it back after the war 22 and still there's nothing given back. All there was is 23 promises. 24 Q: And in your view, as of late 1994 25 then, this continual stalling that you've described in
581 the promise to return the land when, in your view, there 2 were no longer military purposes to justify it being 3 kept -- 4 A: That's right. 5 Q: -- did that contribute at all, or was 6 that having an emotional impact on the people who were 7 still waiting for this land to be returned at Stoney 8 Point? 9 A: Frustrations always was there, but 10 then again after a while you get used to the frustration. 11 Q: Hmm hmm. 12 A: So there wasn't, you know, really -- 13 what would I say -- anything to give the people a push. 14 Like, everybody was getting used of hearing the stalling 15 tactics and they just more or less didn't care anymore 16 because they said anything that comes out of the National 17 Defence, the Government, ignore it because they won't -- 18 they will not really give anything. All they're going to 19 do is promise stuff. 20 And a lot of people were just getting 21 frustrated and they were just getting used of hearing all 22 these excuses and that -- I guess that's why I was 23 pushing so hard to get something started, like, the 24 Government talking to the Chief and Council. That was 25 the main idea and there was a lot of people that had the
591 same -- same idea. 2 Q: And as at the -- the time that you 3 left Stoney Point as Chief, what was the barometer of 4 emotions at that point? 5 A: Well, a lot of people were -- they 6 didn't like how I was doing things and they wanted to do 7 things on their own. And I disagreed with it because I 8 said it wasn't their proper way to do it and a lot of 9 people were just doing whatever they wanted to do 10 anymore. 11 Q: And when you say, doing what "they 12 wanted to do," is this symptomatic in your view of -- of 13 the fact that the attempts made by you to do things 14 properly didn't seem to be returning the land very 15 quickly? 16 A: Well, it didn't have anything to do 17 with returning the land, it was -- the reason why I left 18 was a lot of people were, more or less, taking advantage 19 of other situations like -- like, when we went and spoke 20 we tried to educate a lot of people out there and there 21 was a lot of people that -- I wouldn't say a lot, but 22 there were some people that were using -- using this to 23 their advantage of more or less fund raising and they 24 were just keeping the money for themselves. 25 And it was taking advantage of other
601 people and I didn't agree with it. And that brought a 2 lot of arguing towards me and there was a lot of other 3 people that just didn't -- I guess, in their way of 4 thinking I wasn't made for -- they just didn't want to 5 listen to me anymore. They wanted to do things their own 6 way because they thought maybe I wasn't doing it 7 properly, not moving fast enough I guess. 8 Q: All right. I'd like to make that 9 letter from the Minister of National Defence the next 10 exhibit, please? 11 THE REGISTRAR: P-203. 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Oh, we've -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's already 14 an exhibit. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Okay. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 18 Q: Now, on the last -- last day, you 19 indicated that you had received a newspaper clipping with 20 handwriting which you interpreted as a -- as threatening. 21 Did you find that newspaper clipping? 22 A: Yes, I did. 23 Q: And can you please describe for us, 24 what is handwritten on this newspaper clipping? 25 A: It's got a -- a clipping of cadets
611 holding a gun and it's written in red marker, I imagine 2 that's what it is. It's: 3 "You're no chief, you stupid jerk." 4 Q: All right. And the article that it's 5 written on top of is entitled, Suspicious Fires Damage 6 Buildings at Military Camp, by Paul Morden at the Sarnia 7 Observer"? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And is this -- let me just show you 10 the document, but is this newspaper document exactly the 11 way you received it in the mail or has there been any 12 alterations to it? 13 A: No. 14 Q: All right. 15 A: It's the same way I received it. 16 Q: I'd like to make this the next 17 exhibit, please? 18 THE REGISTRAR: P-204. 19 20 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-204: Sarnia Observer article 21 Suspicious Fires Damage 22 Buildings at Military Camp, 23 sent to Carl George with 24 notation "You're No Chief, 25 You Stupid Jerk."
621 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is there a 2 date on that document? 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 7 Q: We're just confirming, Mr. Tolsma, 8 that that is the newspaper article that you provided to 9 me this morning. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Thank you. Now, what do you think 12 gave rise to these sentiments being expressed to you in 13 this form? 14 A: Well, it all has to do with the way 15 some of the people were. They wouldn't listen and at 16 that time. 17 Like I said, a lot of -- there was a few 18 people that were going out and talking to other people. 19 And what I wanted to do was educate people and there's a 20 few that were going out and just, like, fundraising and 21 keeping money for themselves for their own purposes and 22 that's not what I intended. 23 So, I -- I got all -- a lot of other 24 people to spread the word that they weren't supposed to 25 talk with these people because they were just there to
631 line their own pockets and that's not what I had 2 intended. 3 Q: And do you recall the -- who these 4 people were, specifically, who you characterize this way? 5 A: Yes. Yes. 6 Q: Who were they? 7 A: It was Maynard T. George, his sisters 8 Janet Cloud and Noreen Kewageshig. They were going up 9 north and talking with people and doing a lot of 10 fundraising and the money would never come back for what 11 we needed and they just more or less kept it. 12 Q: Now, this article I see is about some 13 problems that apparently occurred at the military camp in 14 relation to the fires being allegedly set and can you 15 tell us what -- what -- what that was about? 16 A: Well, I think what they were trying 17 to do was make it like someone else sent it and they were 18 just using the clipping. 19 But, like I said last -- the first time I 20 was here, my oldest son was married to Maynard T.'s 21 daughter, Marsha and when I received this in the mail, 22 there was like a small child's handwriting addressing the 23 letter and she -- Marsha looked at it and she said, what 24 -- let me have a closer look at that, she says, that's my 25 niece's handwriting. She says, I know this handwriting.
641 So, I open it up and that -- this clipping 2 is what I found in there and I only figured like they 3 tried to make it like someone else sent it and -- because 4 at that time I think I was spreading the word to -- not 5 to -- for anyone to give them any money any more. 6 Q: And did you happen to keep that 7 envelope? 8 A: I did for quite a while, but I just - 9 - I couldn't find it. 10 Q: All right. And my question was, to 11 an extent, aimed at the content of the newspaper article 12 as opposed to the handwriting on it. And this newspaper 13 article reports that there were outhouses and storage 14 buildings at Camp Ipperwash having been damaged by fire 15 and vandalism. 16 And I take it that there were some 17 allegations that this was committed by people within your 18 group and you responded that they were not involved in 19 those fires. 20 Now, do -- can you shed some light as to 21 these events? 22 A: Well there was two (2) -- there was 23 one (1) outhouse. Like I don't know if anybody's ever 24 been on Camp Ipperwash but at -- in the back part there's 25 an inland lake and when the cadets are there they go on
651 top of, like, this big sand hill and they use this cable 2 to slide across to the other side and there's a outhouse 3 there and it was like -- it was -- it is fairly big. 4 And there was a lot of dead grass around 5 it and there was another one over in the trailer park, 6 like where the -- in the summer time the instructors 7 would bring their trailers in and they would it's a 8 campground for -- for the RCR's and the ones that are 9 teaching the cadets and there's an outhouse there. 10 And at that time someone must have set the 11 grass on fire. Because these buildings were, these 12 little outhouses were -- oh, they were old so when they 13 burnt they -- it was just like putting a match to paper. 14 Q: Hmm hmm. 15 A: So, there was a lot of dead grass 16 around these areas and anybody would set a match to this 17 -- this grass, these buildings would go in flame -- up in 18 flame which they did. 19 Q: And was it -- do you believe it was 20 someone or anyone from your group that was responsible 21 for the fires referred to in this article? 22 A: Well, at that time I don't -- I asked 23 everybody and they said we weren't even around that area. 24 Like, a lot of people would come in -- like non-Native 25 and, you know, they wanted to go canoeing or just to look
661 around in which we let a lot of people come in there and 2 just to look around and go canoeing. 3 But after a while I found out like they 4 were just in there to snoop around and but -- you know, I 5 said well let them, we have nothing to hide. 6 And these fires, I just -- I asked 7 everyone and they said it wasn't them and they were -- 8 were all in certain spots, you know, at their trailers or 9 wherever they were staying and they just -- they denied 10 that they started them. 11 So I, you know, I couldn't say for sure 12 who started it. I checked it all out as best as I could 13 and they said they never did it so I -- I have to go on 14 that. 15 Q: Thank you. 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That completes my 17 examination, Commissioner. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 19 Ms. Vella. 20 I think this would be a good time. We'll 21 take a morning break and we'll start the cross- 22 examination right after. 23 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 24 for fifteen (15) minutes. 25
671 --- Upon recessing at 11:46 a.m. 2 --- Upon resuming at 12:04 p.m. 3 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 5 resumed. Please be seated. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 7 Klippenstein...? 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Good morning, 11 Commissioner. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 13 morning. 14 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Good morning, 15 Mr. Tolsma. 16 THE WITNESS: Good morning. 17 18 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN. 19 Q: I'm one of the lawyers for the Estate 20 of Dudley George and brothers and sisters of Dudley 21 George. We've heard evidence earlier in this Inquiry 22 that in 1827 the Crown signed a Treaty with your people. 23 And that in that Treaty, the Crown committed and 24 guaranteed that the original Stoney Point Reserve which 25 included the lands that later became the Park and the
681 army base, would in fact be Native lands in perpetuity. 2 Do you accept or agree with that evidence? 3 A: You said later -- later the Park? 4 Q: Should I repeat the question for you? 5 A: Yeah, just at the beginning there. 6 Q: As I said, we've heard evidence that 7 in 1827 the Crown signed a treaty with your people and 8 that in that treaty the Crown committed and guaranteed 9 that the original Stoney Point Reserve which included the 10 lands that later became the Park and the army base would 11 in fact be Native lands in perpetuity? 12 A: Well the -- the Park and -- didn't 13 come later. It was -- it was all there in one (1) 14 package which they gave. 15 Q: And you mentioned something about 16 that in part of your testimony the other day and I want 17 to ask you about that. I believe in your testimony that 18 you said that what became the Ipperwash Park lands and 19 the army camp lands were in your mind are one in the 20 same. 21 Is my recollection on that roughly 22 correct? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And from what you've just said, I 25 understand that you accept that that unity of those lands
691 is also set out in the treaty; is that your 2 understanding? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: In your testimony the other day, you 5 also discussed a letter that was signed by you in which 6 you talked about your peoples' right to -- and then this 7 -- you use the phrase, "exclusive enjoyment and use" by 8 the Stoney Point First Nations Reserve. 9 Do -- do you recall that phrase? 10 A: Yes. Yes. 11 Q: I'm going to suggest to you that part 12 of the promises that were made in the Treaty of 1827 was 13 that your reserve lands would be your -- for your 14 peoples' exclusive enjoyment and use. 15 Would you accept or agree with that 16 suggestion? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And in your testimony at the end of 19 last day you were asked whether you had any suggestions 20 for the Commission and you said the Government should 21 fulfill the agreements; is that right? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Would the agreements that you had in 24 mind include the Treaty of 1827? 25 A: Yes.
701 Q: And also at the end of your testimony 2 the other day you were asked what should happen to the 3 Park lands and the Army Camp lands and you said they 4 should be given back; is that right? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Would you agree with me that giving 7 back the Park lands and the Army Camp lands would be 8 taking a step towards repairing and honouring the Treaty 9 of 1827 10 A: Yes, it would. 11 Q: In your several years of speaking out 12 about the Stoney Point Reserve lands, did anyone from the 13 Provincial Government or the Federal Government or the 14 Department of National Defence or the OPP ever mention 15 the 1827 treaty in discussion with you that you can 16 recall? 17 A: No. 18 Q: And over those years, did anyone from 19 the Provincial Government or the Federal Government or 20 the Department of National Defence or the OPP ever refer 21 to the 1827 treaty in any document that you can recall? 22 A: Not that I can recall, no. 23 Q: Would you agree with me that the 24 confrontation and violence that surrounded the death of 25 Dudley George would not have happened if the Crown had
711 honoured its treaty commitments to recognize the original 2 Stoney Point Reserve as native lands in perpetuity? 3 A: That's right. 4 Q: Would you support a recommendation by 5 this Commission at the end of its process that the 6 Provincial Government give up any claim it might have to 7 the Ipperwash Park lands and other parts of the original 8 Stoney Point Reserve and work toward the full and formal 9 return of those lands to native people? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And would you agree with me that 12 honouring those treaty land commitments would be a way 13 for the Provincial Government to move towards a better 14 relationship with your people? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Thank you, Mr. Tolsma, I have no 17 further questions. Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 Mr. Rosenthal...? 20 21 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 22 Q: Good morning -- good morning, Mr. 23 Tolsma. 24 A: Good morning. 25 Q: My name is Peter Rosenthal, I'm one
721 (1) of the Counsel for a group of descendants of Dan and 2 Melva George under the name Aazhoodena and George Family 3 Group. 4 Now, you've told us a little bit about 5 your mother being appropriated -- 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: -- from Stoney Point and I'd just 8 like to ask you a little bit more about that if I may, to 9 begin. 10 You -- you told us that she was given an 11 ultimatum by the Military, move within a week or you'll 12 be moved, is that correct? 13 A: That's right. 14 Q: And so it was on very short notice 15 that she had to move, evidently? 16 A: Yes. Well, the way she explained it 17 to me was, when she came home from school there was a lot 18 of people -- a lot of Army guys and a lot of Army 19 equipment -- trucks moving around, and she was wondering 20 what was going on. And she asked her father what was 21 going on and he couldn't really tell her. 22 She said she still could picture him with 23 tears in his eyes and he said, We have to move. And he 24 said he had a friend on Kettle Point that he could buy a 25 little bit of land off of and -- and -- which helped him
731 move the house down there. 2 Q: So, they actually moved their house 3 that was at Stoney Point reserve to Kettle Point? 4 A: Kettle Point, yes. 5 Q: Now, we've heard a bit I think, from 6 you, and much from other witnesses that this forced 7 relocation of people created all sorts of bitterness with 8 respect to both groups of people, the Kettle Point people 9 who seemed to resent people coming in and the Stoney 10 Point people who resented being forcibly moved. 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And you heard about some of that from 13 your mother, I gather -- 14 A: Oh, yes. 15 Q: And I would suggest to you that, 16 unfortunately, the bitterness created by that is still 17 evident today in various ways; is that correct? 18 A: When you talk about it, like with -- 19 in -- if you're at meetings and stuff and a lot of -- 20 yes, it's still there, because a lot of people will speak 21 out and say, well, you people can just move back. 22 You know, move off our reserve. I heard 23 that, oh, a few years ago and it still exists, yes. 24 Q: And previous to the appropriation in 25 1942, I gather that the relationships between people on
741 the two (2) reserves were very harmonious; isn't that 2 fair to say? 3 A: It was, yes, because my mother said 4 that they used to come down, like there used to be a 5 church on Kettle Point right at the corner there and that 6 it still stands today and they said they used to get 7 along with everybody and used to shake hands and welcome 8 everybody and every -- there was no hatred between 9 anybody at that time and everybody got along great. 10 Q: So, we can allay all the problems of 11 that type at the feet of the Department of National 12 Defence for seizing that land in 1942, it seems. 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Now, then there's the question of 15 what can we do in the future. We're here with that 16 bitterness still there and there's a question of who 17 should get the lands if they are returned. 18 They're sort of de facto returned at the 19 moment in some sense, it's occupied by First Nations 20 people not the military, but there has to be some 21 regularization of this and as you know, and as you've 22 alluded to, there's much dispute between the people as to 23 whether it should return to the descendants of the people 24 who were appropriated or should it return to the joint 25 Kettle and Stoney Point Band Council representing all the
751 people from either reserves. 2 So, that's background to my question to 3 you, sir. 4 A: Well, as it stands today, like, 5 everybody's intermarried now and everybody is just one 6 (1) as far as I'm concerned now. With the arguing and 7 stuff, we have to -- we have to live with that for the 8 rest of our lives and there's nothing you can really do 9 about it and you get that no matter where you live but -- 10 Q: But, I would like to suggest to you a 11 possible remedy for that, and see if you think it might 12 help, namely the Stoney Point people who feel a special 13 connection to that land, they get the land. 14 But, because of the harm that they've 15 caused over the years, the Federal Government gives so 16 much monetary compensation to the other people and to the 17 Stoney Point people that everybody walks away happy. 18 Would something -- 19 A: Well -- 20 Q: -- in that direction be reasonable? 21 A: Well, I have to explain now, a lot of 22 the Elders are -- are not here no more -- 23 Q: Yes. 24 A: Like they're -- there is maybe at the 25 most, as far as I know, there's maybe two (2) or three
761 (3) left, but to give them the land, they wouldn't want 2 it. 3 Q: Well, I -- I talk about the 4 descendants of the Stoney Point -- 5 A: Well, the descendants, it can be 6 returned but in my way of thinking right now, like the 7 Park and the beach front is usable. But the built-up 8 area right now, it's -- it's so much damage, like the 9 chemicals that's buried there and the -- you don't know 10 what's buried in there. 11 And I wouldn't really want to see anybody 12 live there, because if you ever -- the Government says, 13 okay, we'll clean it. And if you -- okay, they say it's 14 clean. You start growing a garden and stuff, all those 15 chemicals will come up into your garden and you eat that 16 stuff and the next generation could have problems, health 17 problems and -- 18 Q: Perhaps, I could rephrase my 19 questions, sir. Would you agree that it would be 20 appropriate for the Federal Government and Provincial 21 Government, perhaps to some extent, to give enough to the 22 Kettle and Stoney Point people to make everyone happy in 23 some sort of settlement -- 24 A: Oh, yes. 25 Q: -- with respect to land and money?
771 A: Yes. 2 Q: And that might erase some of the 3 bitterness that is still -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- present from 1942? 6 A: It would. 7 Q: Thank you. And would you agree that 8 some of the problems that we've heard about that, and in 9 particular from your testimony too, about internal 10 problems and dissension among the people who began in 11 1993 to occupy the Stoney Point Reserve to re-occupy it, 12 that much of that was caused by the fact that there 13 wasn't any formal organization, there wasn't any formal 14 monies available and so on. 15 It was a difficult situation and that led 16 to tensions; is that a fair summary? 17 A: Yeah. Yes. 18 Q: Now, you told us that you had a map 19 that showed, I believe it was three (3) grave sites, in 20 what was the Ipperwash Park part of this reserve? 21 A: Well I don't have it. We had it when 22 -- like when we were at Camp Ipperwash there. Like the 23 building we built, like the Argument Hall, we called it, 24 I can recall looking at it there and -- but where it is 25 now I -- I couldn't say. But, yeah, I seen it, yes.
781 Q: But there you had seen such a map? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Do you recall where you got that map? 4 A: Well Maynard T. was our researcher 5 and where he got it I couldn't say. 6 Q: And do you recall approximately when 7 you first became aware of the existence of that map? 8 A: It was sometime in '93. 9 Q: '93. And did you make that known to 10 other people widely that there was some indication that 11 there were at least three (3) grave sites in the Park 12 area? 13 A: Oh, yes. 14 Q: Okay. And including, did you tell 15 any of the Provincial officials or any of the OPP 16 officers or anybody outside the Stoney Point First 17 Nation? 18 A: Well, I can't recall but if -- if we 19 did it wouldn't have been to the OPP's. It would have 20 been to the Government officials. 21 Q: I see. 22 A: I can't remember if we did send the 23 letter or not. 24 Q: I gather that Prime Minister Kim 25 Campbell, during her tenure as Prime Minister, made some
791 promise to your understanding to return the lands; is 2 that correct? 3 A: Well, at the time when -- like she 4 came down there, like in a helicopter, and -- to look at 5 the land and shortly after that she I -- I can't 6 remember how she mentioned it if it was in the newspaper 7 or not, I don't think it was in the newspaper but she 8 said we should be giving this -- this land back, it's no 9 longer needed by the army. 10 But it never went any further than that 11 because after that she -- like her time in the Government 12 ended shortly after that. 13 Q: I see, thank you. I understand that 14 at some time perhaps in February of 1994, there was an 15 incident where a military person stole a flag -- 16 A: A flag, yes. 17 Q: -- from the First Nations people; is 18 that correct? 19 A: Yes. They were the -- they were -- 20 let's see -- they were young RCR's from Quebec and we had 21 flags, oh posted here and there, and they took that flag 22 and at that time they sprayed swastikas on the road with 23 red paint and on the trees and one (1) of the guys that 24 was at the camp with us there, he seen them from a 25 distance.
801 So I went -- at that time I went to 2 Sergeant Major White and he went up to these RCR's and he 3 got the flag back and he apologized and he shipped those 4 guys out shortly after that. 5 Q: And you say in addition to the flag 6 there -- there were swastikas painted on the road? 7 A: There was swastika painted on the 8 road and on the trees in red paint. 9 Q: And were these -- these were large 10 swastikas that you could see from far away? 11 A: Not from a far distance, no. Like, 12 the trees were, say, anywhere from a twelve (12) -- 13 twelve (12) inch tree that are small and but the one (1) 14 you mainly seen was on -- on the road. 15 Q: Yes. And you -- you say that some of 16 the First Nations people saw some Military people 17 actually painting those swastikas? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: What happened to the swastikas? Were 20 they removed, or did the -- 21 A: Oh, yes. 22 Q: Sorry? 23 A: They were removed. 24 Q: They were eventually removed? 25 A: Yes.
811 Q: As part of your same discussion with 2 the Military officials? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: You told us, sir, that your great- 5 great-grandfather, I believe I have the right number of 6 greats, Levi Johnson, had been one (1) of the chiefs of 7 Stoney Point; is that correct? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: In fact, you told us that a number of 10 your ancestors had been chiefs at Stoney Point; is that 11 correct? 12 A: Yes, it would. 13 Q: And did they all have the name, 14 Johnson or -- 15 A: No. 16 Q: No. 17 A: Well, in the beginning, like in the 18 War of 1812, it was Wabegonce (phonetic). 19 Q: Yes? 20 A: And then shortly after that, like I 21 mentioned before, it was Oshawnoo. He was from the 22 States and he was given Kettle Point and Wagegonce was 23 given what we know today is Stoney Point. And from 24 there, his son was given the name Johnson, and from there 25 on down the ladder they kept the name Johnson.
821 Q: I see. And they were all chiefs at 2 Stoney Point, specifically, as opposed to Kettle Point, 3 for example, right? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And so, certainly for many years at 6 least, your family history indicates that there was a 7 separate chief at Stoney Point and the family history 8 indicates it was one (1) of your ancestors, in fact? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And as -- as you know there's been 11 much discussion as to whether or not Stoney Point was or 12 is or should be a separate reserve. 13 A: It -- 14 Q: Now, this would suggest that at 15 least at some point, it was a separate enough reserve to 16 have its own chief; isn't that fair to say? 17 A: Well, both Stoney Point and Kettle 18 Point had their own chiefs. 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: But, as -- a lot of people don't -- 21 don't understand, like, even back in 1812 war after the 22 land was given to Wabegonce and Oshawnoo, Oshawnoo 23 married Wabegonce's daughter and that intermarried, so it 24 became one (1) from that point on, but they still had 25 their chiefs on both --
831 Q: Yes. 2 A: -- land bases. 3 Q: Now, I believe you've told us in your 4 testimony the other day and perhaps alluded to it today, 5 too, that you were happy with the Kettle and Stoney Point 6 Band Council taking over the negotiations at some point? 7 A: Hmm hmm. 8 Q: But, in fact, during 1993 and '94 and 9 '95 and so on, was it -- weren't the Stoney Point people 10 who were occupying the Camp of the view that they should 11 negotiate with respect to the return of their reserve at 12 Stoney Point? 13 A: A lot of people felt that way. 14 Q: And including -- you expressed views 15 in that direction at that time, did you not? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Yes. Now, I believe it was in 18 November of 2003 that police interviewed you with -- and 19 -- with respect to, perhaps among other things, the 20 helicopter incident; is that correct? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: So, what did the officers tell you in 23 November of 2003 as to why they wanted to interview you 24 so many years after this event? 25 A: They wanted to more or less get
841 anything that they missed. 2 Q: But, why was that -- was that in 3 anticipation of this Inquiry or for what purpose did they 4 tell you the interview was being conducted? 5 A: They were just trying to find out 6 information, that's all they said. 7 Q: They didn't say why? They didn't say 8 whether it was for a lawsuit or for an Inquiry or for -- 9 A: Well, they said -- 10 Q: -- criminal charge -- 11 A: -- they mentioned there was an 12 Inquiry coming up. 13 Q: Oh, they did, yeah? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: I see. So, they told you there's an 16 Inquiry coming up and they want to find out more about 17 it? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Basically. So, that -- that was the 20 reason that they were re-opening the case, as you 21 understood what -- 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: -- they were telling you? 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: And how did the interview get
851 arranged, then? They phoned you up and asked if you 2 would meet with them or what? 3 A: Yeah. I'm pretty sure that's the way 4 it happened, yeah. 'Cause they all had my phone number 5 and that's the way they usually got in touch with me. 6 Q: And the officers who interviewed you, 7 were they officers that you knew prior to November of 8 2003? 9 A: No. 10 Q: No. 11 A: No, they were just -- they were young 12 guys and I didn't know them. So, I really didn't say too 13 much because I don't talk to anybody that I don't know -- 14 or ever seen them around. 15 Q: Now, evidently you told those 16 officers that Abraham George or Abe George or Hamster as 17 he was also known; is that correct? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: That he had told you that he had 20 fired a shot or fired from a shotgun at the helicopter -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- is that correct? 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: Now, you had denied any such 25 knowledge years earlier, shortly after the helicopter
861 incident -- 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: -- incident, right? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And you had vigorously denied any 6 such knowledge and were reported in newspapers as 7 having -- 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: -- denied such knowledge. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And when you were asked by Ms. Vella 12 as to why, I believe you indicated that was out of 13 respect for Mr. Abraham George as an Elder. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: But, sir, do you think that it shows 16 respect for Mr. Abraham George as an Elder to make those 17 allegations after he's deceased and he can't give any 18 explanation or defend himself in any way? 19 A: Well, there's documents and 20 everything. There are reports that was already brought 21 out, anyway. 22 Q: It was going to come out anyway? 23 A: It -- it was already out. 24 Q: I see. Now, were you told that by 25 the officers in the interview?
871 A: No, I heard them. Like I seen the -- 2 a few documents and everybody was talking about it 3 anyway. 4 Q: When did you see such documents, sir? 5 A: I can't remember when, but it wasn't 6 too long ago and I heard, well, everybody knows about it 7 so you might as well just tell the truth now anyway. 8 Q: Are you -- you say it wasn't too long 9 ago. Are you talking after your interview in November 10 2003 that you saw such documents? 11 A: No, no, no, no. Way after that. 12 Q: Way after that? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: So, recently within the last couple 15 of months, you -- 16 A: Oh, yes, yes. 17 Q: -- were shown such documents by 18 Commission Counsel, you mean? 19 A: Well, no, is -- it was -- it could 20 have been a police report, I'm not sure. Like, I seen 21 one somewhere but, you know, if you don't pay much 22 attention to it, then you kind of forget where -- where 23 it come from. 24 Q: Now, the other person who you say was 25 with you at the time that you spoke to Abraham George
881 about this incident -- 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: -- was a person named Robert George, 4 also -- 5 A: Robert George. 6 Q: -- known as Nobby; is that correct? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And he, unfortunately, is deceased as 9 well. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: So, we can't check your account 12 against anybody else's account of that conversation that 13 you say involved three (3) people; is that -- 14 A: That's right. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: But, you indicated, sir, that it was 19 clear to you from having seen pictures of the hole in the 20 helicopter, that that hole couldn't have been caused by 21 the weapon that Abraham George had at his disposal, 22 isn't -- 23 A: No. 24 Q: -- that right? 25 A: That's right.
891 Q: Because he had a shotgun -- 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: -- and the shotgun couldn't have made 4 that kind of a hole -- 5 A: No. 6 Q: -- unless -- unless, I suppose, if 7 the shotgun were very close to the helicopter as it was 8 fired; is that fair to say? 9 A: That's right. Because the way I 10 looked at it, a helicopter -- if you shot at a helicopter 11 and this is what -- it still gets me today. They 12 reported that they -- that they were shot. They said 13 they could hear it. But how can you hear a shot when you 14 got the headgear on and helicopter making so much loud 15 noise? 16 And shortly after that, well, they took 17 pictures of it, newspaper took pictures of it, but there 18 -- as far as I know there wasn't really an investigation 19 and that was fixed shortly after that. But what they 20 were saying, it was a high powered gun. Okay, if it was, 21 there's an entry shot but where's the exit hole. There 22 was none. 23 And if it went in it should have been in 24 the helicopter some place. And if it -- and with a 25 shotgun if -- like if anybody knows a shotgun, you cannot
901 shoot very far and it would be like pepper spray. 2 Q: Yes. 3 A: And -- and if it was -- like when 4 they were flying as far as I know, everybody was saying 5 they were flying tree top level. Now, this endangering 6 lives, they were right there too flying tree top level. 7 And even a shotgun still there was no like little 8 indentations. Nobody said anything about that. So, I 9 don't even think he -- he hit it. He just shot up in the 10 air. 11 Q: The shotgun that Abraham George had 12 that you say he had that on that occasion, fired 13 buckshot? Is that appropriate terminology? 14 A: It was a Number 4 Shot. 15 Q: Number 4 Shot. 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And so but that would have pellets 18 that would -- 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: -- that would spray with the distance 21 further apart as you got further distance from -- 22 A: Oh, yes. 23 Q: -- the target, right? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And so you'd have to be within a few
911 feet of the helicopter with something like that. If 2 you're going to cause a hole that was concentrated like 3 the hole that we see in the helicopter; isn't that fair? 4 A: Oh you'd have to be about five (5) 5 feet in front of something like that. 6 Q: Maximum say five (5) feet. 7 A: Oh, yes. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 9 minute, Mr. Rosenthal. Are you finished with the 10 helicopter incident? Because I think Ms. Tuck-Jackson 11 was going to object. But if you're not finished -- 12 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Maybe, I'm not 13 finished. We'll see what she says. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, if you 15 are finished then we don't have to -- are you going to 16 object to the helicopter incident going any further? 17 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Mr. 18 Commissioner, I anticipate that you know exactly why I've 19 rosen. I'm simply raising on the same point I rose in 20 the last occasion which is that this Witness is not 21 qualified to give any type of opinion on this area. So, 22 I would caution counsel as to how far he's going to go. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. I had 24 a sense that he was just about finished that incident. 25 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. As far as the
921 -- any questions about technical expertise. There may be 2 -- still the question is to the conversation with Abraham 3 George that's all. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, carry 5 on. 6 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I presume My Friend 7 will not object to that. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 10 Q: So, you came to your conclusion to 11 this you told us and it is relevant, sir, to that 12 conversation is that the weapon that -- your conclusion 13 for whatever weight you may take as far as expertise, is 14 that the weapon that you saw Mr. Abraham George have on 15 that occasion could not have been the weapon that did the 16 damage that is pictured in the pictures we've seen of the 17 helicopter; is that correct? 18 A: That's right. 19 Q: Now, sir, therefore what were you 20 thinking as you met Mr. George then on that night, Mr. 21 Abraham George. In other words, did you think he fired a 22 shot in the air at some point that night to try to scare 23 somebody or do you -- did you think that he had shot at 24 the helicopter. 25 A: Well he told us right there that he
931 took a shot up in the air. 2 Q: In the air? Did you say he aimed at 3 the helicopter or no he just shot in the air? 4 A: He just shot in the air. 5 Q: And did he say he shot in the air 6 when the helicopter was nearby or? 7 A: Oh, yes. 8 Q: But it was nearby? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: But he didn't say he aimed at the 11 helicopter? 12 A: He didn't say that he aimed at the 13 helicopter, he just says he thought he had shot up in the 14 air. 15 Q: And did he give you any indication as 16 to how high up in the air the helicopter was at the time 17 he shot it? 18 A: He didn't say himself, but other 19 people said that it was hovering at tree top level. 20 Q: Tree top level? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And about how high would that have 23 been in your understanding as to the tree tops at that -- 24 A: Thirty (30) feet. 25 Q: -- sorry?
941 A: Thirty (30) feet. 2 Q: Thirty (30) feet or so? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: Now, we've heard from several 5 witnesses that after that helicopter incident there was a 6 search of the premises of people on the Stoney Point 7 Reserve; is that correct? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And you told us that the people were 10 warned in advance of that search? 11 A: I -- yes. I think it was Officer 12 Bowman (phonetic) from Grand Bend said that they were 13 going to come in and -- and search for weapons. 14 Q: He said that to whom? 15 A: Officer Bowman told me. 16 Q: Told you? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And -- 19 A: I was -- I was warned and I told 20 everybody else not to lock their trailers or they'd use a 21 crowbar to open the doors. 22 Q: You told everybody to open the doors 23 and allow the search to take place? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And when did you tell people that?
951 A: As soon as I found out. 2 Q: And how much before the search was 3 that? 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 A: Well, I believe it was that morning 8 and they were supposed to come -- come in. 9 Q: So, that morning they were going to 10 come in and you just -- as they were coming in, 11 essentially, were telling people cooperate, don't -- 12 don't lock your trailers and so on? 13 A: That's right. 14 Q: But -- so that's essentially as the 15 search is -- search was beginning, you were telling 16 people don't resist, cooperate? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And you did that, I gather, because 19 you wanted people to be cooperative? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And you were confident that, in fact, 22 the search would not reveal anything because you knew 23 that people were not armed at that location; isn't that 24 correct? 25 A: That's right.
961 Q: And you know, as other witnesses have 2 told us that people had determined that this would be a 3 peaceful occupation and they weren't going to be using 4 arms in support of their aims, right? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: And that's one reason you were 7 confident that people -- just let them search, not going 8 to be a problem, let them search. 9 A: Yes. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Now, particularly with respect to 14 firearms at the camp, Marlin Simon testified here some 15 months ago now, and he told us that he stored his 16 weapons, of which he had several, I believe at Kettle 17 Point and just perhaps used it at Stoney Point for 18 hunting occasionally, but he stored them at Kettle Point. 19 Is that consistent with your 20 understanding, sir? 21 A: Well, I seen him with a hunting rifle 22 but I didn't know where he stored it. 23 Q: You don't know where he kept it at 24 night? 25 A: No.
971 2 (BRIEF PAUSE) 3 4 Q: And you told us something to the 5 effect that you, yourself disapproved the entry to the 6 Park as opposed to the camp earlier, because you were 7 afraid someone might get hurt or something; was that your 8 concern? 9 A: Well, I -- when I was there, I didn't 10 have any intentions of taking over the Park -- 11 Q: Yes. 12 A: -- and when we did talk, we talked to 13 the head people there, but with -- when the actual group 14 went in, well I didn't have anything to do with that, but 15 I -- I didn't agree with it, how it was done, no. 16 Q: You didn't agree with it, but you did 17 -- you did agree that the Park was Stoney Point land and 18 should be ultimately returned to the Stoney Point people? 19 A: Oh, yes. 20 Q: Yes. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: But, you just didn't agree with that 23 tactic at that time? 24 A: No. 25 Q: And why -- why did you agree with
981 taking over the Army Camp part but not the Park part? 2 A: Because it's supposed to be all -- 3 all one (1). And if you're talking with getting the land 4 back, that includes the -- the Park, plus the beachfront. 5 Q: Plus the beachfront? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: So, your -- your concern was that 8 they weren't taking enough when they took back just the 9 Park? 10 A: Well, I didn't -- when -- the way I 11 look at it, if you're talking to get all the land back, 12 you include everything. 13 Q: But -- 14 A: I don't agree -- I wasn't there, so I 15 can't agree that -- the taking the Park over was going to 16 solve everything. 17 Q: Right, okay. 18 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: With your 19 indulgence, Mr. Commissioner. 20 Thank you, Mr. Commissioner, thank you, 21 Mr. Tolsma. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 23 Mr. Rosenthal. 24 Mr. Ross or Ms. -- Mr. Ross...? 25
991 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you, Mr. 3 Commissioner. 4 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: Mr. Tolsma, at the conclusion of my 7 examination of Cecil Bernard George, I suggested to him 8 that the unfortunate death of Dudley George is what 9 triggered any form of movement between the Government and 10 the claimants of the land and that was the first thing 11 that started to move things forward since 1942 and he 12 agreed. 13 Do you share that view, also? 14 A: That's what made things move a little 15 further? 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: Yeah, I agree with that. 18 Q: Yes, so nothing was happening up 19 until the death of Dudley George? 20 A: Not anything that you could really 21 agree with, no. 22 Q: Nothing meaningful? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Lots of lip service -- 25 A: That's right.
1001 Q: -- but nothing meaningful? 2 A: No. 3 Q: Yeah. Mr. George, I don't propose to 4 walk you through all the documentation, and in that 5 regard, Mr. Commissioner, there is something that has 6 caused me some concern and perhaps you can advise me. 7 As far as documents that have been filed, 8 but not specifically put to any witness and not marked as 9 an exhibit, would these be considered in any way by the 10 Commission either during the Part 1 or are they part of 11 Part 2? So, all documents will be considered? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think the 13 answer to that is yes. 14 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Okay. Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: They don't 16 have to be marked as an exhibit in order to be 17 considered. 18 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you kindly, Mr. 19 Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 23 Q: Now, I'm going to just step back to 24 1993, Mr. Tolsma. In May of 1993 when the occupation of 25 the range took place, I take it, sir, that you supported
1011 that occupation? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And I take it, sir, that to a large 4 extent, you were a part of that occupation? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Yeah. And I take it, also, that at 7 that time, there was a substantial support for yourself 8 and the leadership who had embarked upon that occupation? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And I take it, sir, that had the 11 Federal Government responded in any meaningful way some 12 proper line of communication would have been established 13 and you would not go down this slippery slope toward the 14 violence that occurred? 15 A: At that time, no. There was -- there 16 was nothing. 17 Q: Things were working well? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Yeah. Now, around that time, I take 20 it that there was a little bit of a rift between the 21 occupiers of the range and the chief and Council down at 22 Stoney -- down at Kettle Point; is that a correct 23 statement? 24 A: Yes, that's right. 25 Q: Yeah. And at that point, there was
1021 also suggestion from Chief Tom Bressette to Indian 2 Affairs that -- that -- that he wants the Georges as far 3 away from the Kettle Point reserve as possible. 4 Were you aware of those comments, that 5 that was the position he had taken? 6 A: No, I wasn't aware of that. 7 Q: Okay, fine, we'll leave that alone. 8 But, in any event, sir, around the time in early 90 -- 9 around the middle of 1993, by that time, Maynard George 10 had done some research and he was of the view that there 11 was sacred areas at Stoney Point? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Now, you made reference to a map 14 produced by Maynard George and I would like to just show 15 you a document and perhaps find out from you whether this 16 is the map that you were speaking about. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: And you can look at the entire 21 document, you're not restricted just to that page. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: I never -- never ever seen this one.
1031 Well, this is just what Maynard drew up. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I take it 6 you haven't seen it, either? 7 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, I haven't seen it. 8 I wonder if Mr. Ross can possibly tell us what the source 9 of this handwritten document is. 10 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Sorry, Mr. 11 Commissioner. I thought that was among the disclosed 12 documents, but perhaps it didn't get photocopied. No 13 problem, I will withdraw it. 14 THE WITNESS: This one here only shows, 15 like, the main -- 16 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: No problem. You don't 17 have to even comment on it. I will withdraw it. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 20 Q: In any event, Mr. Tolsma, I take it 21 that through 1993 there was a substantive effort of the 22 people who classified themselves as the Stoney Point Band 23 to work with the Kettle Point chief and Council trying to 24 come to some resolution of the overall problem; is that a 25 fair statement?
1041 A: Yes. 2 Q: Yeah. Now I will ask you to look at 3 Document Number 9000052. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is that in 8 the binder of materials that we have? 9 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: It is -- it is among 10 the records. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, I'm just 12 wondering where -- 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It's not in the binder. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's not in 15 the binder? 16 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: It's not -- pardon me. 17 It's not -- it's among the -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Can you put 19 it on the screen? 20 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: It's not on the -- 21 it's not among the documents. 22 Perhaps you can pass this one to the 23 Witness and I'll just turn off my computer. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 25 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Or I can read from
1051 the... 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS. 4 Q: Mr. Tolsma, I want to walk you 5 through this document to find out from you whether or 6 not, in your view, it is representative of the mood of 7 the two (2) groups as at October, 1993. 8 And it reads -- these comments by Glenn 9 George. You remember who Glenn George is? 10 A: Yes, I do. 11 Q: And when -- when you were involved in 12 the leadership of the Stoney Point group, Glenn George 13 was also part of the leadership group; am I correct? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And his comments with respect to -- 16 his comments as at October 12, 1993 reads as follows: 17 "I am pleased that this meeting is 18 taking place. I believe that is long 19 overdue for both communities to come 20 together as First Nation brothers to 21 openly discuss our common interests and 22 without anger to determine how we can 23 best deal with Canada, 24 the ones who created the problem which 25 we must now solve."
1061 So, far do you agree with those statements 2 that the problem was created by Canada and left for the 3 First Nation to solve? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And do you agree further that there 6 was a spirit of attempted co-operation as between the two 7 (2) groups to identify how they were going to solve these 8 problems? 9 A: We tried, yes. And we agreed. 10 Q: It goes on to say: 11 "We all know what our history is. But 12 what we do not all agree on is what is 13 the means. I suggest we start with 14 what we do agree on. That in 1942 15 Canada gave our land to National 16 Defence and changed our history 17 forever." 18 Do you agree with that so far? 19 A: I agree with it so far like with the 20 changing the -- well they really -- 21 Q: Yeah. We have to find out what the 22 situation was in 1942 -- 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: -- and to work forward from there. 25 A: Yes.
1071 Q: Was that the sentiment of your group 2 at that time? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Then there's a reference to Ron and I 5 take it that would be Ron George? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: "Ron brought us up to date on the 8 meeting on October 1, 1993. We are in 9 full agreement that we need to move on 10 Canada as soon as we have done the 11 homework necessary to put our best case 12 on the table. We have decided on our 13 two (2) representatives on the 14 negotiating team and I hope that Kettle 15 Point will do the same if you have not 16 yet done so." 17 So, you had identified people for your 18 negotiating team by then? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: "With the negotiating team in place 21 the structure will be available to get 22 on with the real world and reduce the 23 politics that have got us off track for 24 too long." 25 A: Yes.
1081 Q: And I guess the politics, sir, was 2 the politics of Stoney versus Kettle and outstanding 3 issues to be resolved before a concentrated effort could 4 be made to address the problems with Canada? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: It goes on, on page 2, it says: 7 "The Stoney Point people had two (2) 8 overriding interests to be resolved 9 against the background of the 1942 10 status." 11 First, bullet: 12 "To see a return of IR-43." 13 And second bullet: 14 "To compensate not only those who lost 15 their land in 1942, but to make full 16 restitution for the wrongful 17 interference with our way of life." 18 I take it, sir, that you would agree that 19 there was a major impact on the way of life of the Stoney 20 Pointers as a result of what happened in 1942? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And that impact is still being felt 23 today; am I correct with that? 24 A: That's right, yeah. 25 Q: It goes on to say:
1091 "We have looked at the material put in 2 front of the Minister of DND and it is 3 clear that we, as First Nation victims, 4 same the -- share the same proprieties 5 -- " 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Priorities. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 9 Q: Priorities. 10 "Whether or not DND accepts that 11 framework, at least we agree on the 12 basics so long as negotiations proceed 13 with our full involvement." 14 So, I take it, sir, that by then the 15 leadership at Kettle Point and your leadership had come 16 with some joint position to advance to the Department of 17 National Defence? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Yeah. It goes on to say: 20 "We can agree on getting on with 21 negotiations. We may not agree on some 22 other things, especially the feeling 23 that a number of Stoney Point people 24 have about the past fifty (50) years 25 and what they want for their future.
1101 There has been discussion about 2 separation. We believe that these 3 feelings and concerns should be dealt 4 with by setting up some kind of process 5 that could bring all our people 6 together to talk and to find solutions. 7 I do not have a specific suggestion as 8 to how we should try to do this, but we 9 need to discuss it. Some people have 10 talked about asking our elders to play 11 a role in this and I think we might all 12 gain if this could happen." 13 Was there -- is this reflective of the 14 sentiments of your group at that time, Mr. Tolsma? 15 A: Yes. Yes. 16 Q: Okay. It goes on to page 3. It 17 says: 18 "If we can set up a way of discussing 19 our future, it should not interfere 20 with the goal of our negotiations with 21 Canada, but at the same time, it should 22 go ahead in parallel with them." 23 So, I take it, sir, that at that time you 24 were thinking of two (2) things; number 1, the specific 25 interests of the Stoney Point group and the collective
1111 interests of the Kettle and Stoney Point people with 2 respect to Canada. Is that a fair way of putting it? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: It goes on to say: 5 "It should be clear that the suggestion 6 to this -- do this does not mean that 7 Stoney Point people are saying that 8 they will not at some time in the 9 future demand separation. What we are 10 saying is that we should at least make 11 a real effort to resolve these problems 12 ourselves within our own community 13 first. Not everyone agrees with this 14 approach, but we feel it's the right 15 thing to do at this point." 16 Again, sir, with your recollection, those 17 statements are correct. Am I -- is that true? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: It goes on to say: 20 "On a different point, Carl..." 21 And I take it that Carl is you? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: "...and Tom..." 24 I take it that is Chief Tom Bressette? 25 A: Yes.
1121 Q: "...Carl and Tom have each signed 2 identical contracts with our joint 3 consultant as a signal that we are 4 ready to work together and to get on 5 with the work." 6 Was the joint consultant, E.E. Hobbs and 7 Associates (phonetic) or do you recall? 8 A: Do I recall E. Hobbs? 9 Q: Hobbs -- 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: -- as the joint consultant? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Yes, okay. 14 "At one point though -- that I would 15 like to make on behalf of Stoney Point 16 is that we are relying on the funds of 17 the First Nation and negotiating money 18 from Canada (DND) to meet our share of 19 these costs. Also I understand that 20 there is no personal liabilities 21 associated with these contracts. Tony 22 Ross has talked to Don Goodwin and 23 confirmed this." 24 So, you had these contracts with your 25 consultants and you wanted to confirm that there was no
1131 personal liability for any of the members and that was 2 confirmed? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Yeah. And it finishes: 5 "On another point, I think the idea of 6 visiting the Sarcee First Nation in 7 Alberta is a good one, and we should 8 try to go there as soon as possible. 9 Thanks for the opportunity to make 10 these comments." 11 Now, Mr. Tolsma, I selected that paper 12 because I wanted to confirm with you that up to around 13 the fall of 1993, there was an optimism as far as your 14 group and the Kettle Point group is concerned, that 15 matters could be addressed and resolved. 16 Is that a fair way to put it? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And again, sir, at that time, you had 19 very strong support among the people who had occupied the 20 range; am I correct? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: So, that with some support from the 23 federal government, something could have happened to 24 result in negotiation rather than the slippery slope that 25 we have seen?
1141 A: Yes. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: Now, as far as the efforts of your 6 group is concerned, do you recall that sometime in July 7 1993, that you had in -- that you had gotten Chief Gord 8 Peters to -- to assist in trying to broker an arrangement 9 with your group and the chief of Kettle and Stoney on a 10 working relationship to go forward? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: So throughout 1993, A), you had the 13 peaceful occupation of the range, correct? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: Lots of efforts in trying to work out 16 something to draw to the attention of the Federal 17 Government that there was an outstanding issue to be 18 addressed, correct? 19 A: Yes, correct. 20 Q: All the time, lip service from the 21 Federal Government but no real action as far as this 22 matter was concerned, correct? 23 A: That's right. 24 Q: In spite of the fact that the land 25 was taken and there was many undertakings to get this
1151 land returned to you? 2 A: That's right. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: And, Mr. George, is it fair -- sorry, 7 Mr. Tolsma, is it fair to say that that spirit of 8 cooperation -- sorry, that the cohesiveness with which 9 you held your group together in 1993, it continued by and 10 large through 1994? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And there was also the support that 13 you were getting from the chief and Council from Kettle 14 Point as far as in a working relationship is concerned, 15 to address the outstanding problems; is that correct? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Is it fair to say, sir, then, that 18 left on your own accord, and without any form of 19 Government assistance, it became difficult with time to 20 keep the group together? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And is it fair to say, sir, that one 23 of the reasons for this is that there was no formalized 24 governance structure that was in place? 25 A: Yes.
1161 Q: And down at Kettle Point at least you 2 had an elected chief, you had councillors, you had 3 recognition by Canada. You had a capacity to deal with 4 the Province of Ontario and other levels of government. 5 But as far as Stoney Point is concerned, 6 it was a number of people, quite cohesive, very well 7 intended but with no governmental structure that was 8 recognized? 9 A: That's right. 10 Q: And as a result of that, sir, things 11 started falling apart? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And they fell apart not because of 14 anything that you either did or you didn't do because 15 it's the natural process that without some structure, 16 things fall apart. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Yeah. And by the middle of 1995, sir 19 -- by the middle of 1995, is it fair to say that -- that 20 the -- the groups started split -- fracturing and into 21 its own smaller components? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And this led to either your 24 withdrawal or being asked to leave, but a breakdown in 25 confidence.
1171 A: Yes. 2 Q: And this breakdown in confidence was 3 -- was followed by further activity among the occupying 4 group to take over the barracks? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And later to take over the Park? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Yeah. Now as far as the lands were 9 concerned, must is being made of the question of burial 10 grounds. 11 Is it fair to say that even if there 12 weren't any burial grounds, these were your lands and you 13 wanted them back? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Yeah. So, as far as this burial 16 ground thing is concerned, that's really a sideshow. The 17 thing is you had your land, they were wrongfully taken 18 and you wanted them back, correct? 19 A: Yes. Yeah, right. 20 Q: And now over the time that you were 21 leading this group, Mr. Tolsma, I've seen copies of 22 letters from the Provincial Government -- from Provincial 23 Government ministers and from Federal Government 24 ministers writing back to you as Chief Carl George. 25 You recall a lot of those letters, don't
1181 you? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Yeah. So, here was it, they're 4 refusing to recognize you formally but playing some kind 5 of lip service and encouraging this concept of Chief Carl 6 George to continue. 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: One of the witnesses, I think it was 9 Mr. French, Mr. Larry French, says that the governments 10 never took the First Nations people seriously. 11 Do you -- do you subscribe to that -- that 12 view. 13 A: Yes. They never took the First 14 Nation people seriously. 15 Q: Now, would you agree with me, sir, 16 that had they taken this group seriously after all the 17 efforts it had made to come up with a joint approach, 18 something that they can listen to, things wouldn't be the 19 way they are right now? 20 A: That's right. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Mr. Commissioner, I do 25 not want to feel pushed and the time is running on. I
1191 was wondering if it's appropriate that we break for 2 lunch. I could imagine that after lunch I could wind up 3 within ten (10) minutes; otherwise, I could waffle for 4 three-quarters of an hour without a break. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's an 6 interesting option. So, I think you're hinting that we 7 should take our lunch break now. 8 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I trust you totally. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 We'll take a lunch break now. 11 Thank you very much, Mr. Ross. 12 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you. 13 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 14 adjourned until 2:20 p.m. 15 16 --- Upon recessing at 1:03 p.m. 17 --- Upon resuming at 2:19 p.m. 18 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 20 resumed. Please be seated. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay, Mr. 25 Ross.
1201 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: Now, Mr. Tolsma, with the situation 7 as has developed, with the occupiers up at Aazhoodena, 8 would you agree with me that it would be unwise to have 9 the police from Kettle Point policing that area with the 10 individuals who are currently in occupation? 11 A: At that time? 12 Q: No, presently. 13 A: It -- I just -- yes, I'd say yes. 14 Q: It would present certain conflicts, 15 wouldn't it? 16 A: It probably would have, yeah. 17 Q: So, that as far as the situation 18 currently is concerned, you've got the occupiers in 19 Aazhoodena and they would probably resist any policing 20 influences from Kettle Point? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: So, the only other policing that's 23 available really, is the OPP? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: However, the incidents that has
1211 occurred in September of 1995, there's still some matters 2 to be resolved as between the OPP and the residents from 3 the perspective of policing? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Yeah. Now, I want to go back a bit 6 to the model which you and Chief Bressette were trying to 7 work on in 1993 and 1994 and probably the first part of 8 1995. 9 My understanding is that the model 10 contemplated the return of the land. 11 A: Hmm hmm. 12 Q: Was that your understanding? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And by that, it meant all the land 15 which constituted IR43? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Yeah. And compensation to the Kettle 18 -- to the Stoney Pointers who were uprooted? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And compensation to the Kettle 21 Pointers who had people imposed on them? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And further, a buying-out by the 24 Government of all the location tickets so that the lands 25 could return to being full and complete communal reserve
1221 lands? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Yeah. And as far as these location 4 tickets are concerned, and I don't propose to go very far 5 with this, could you perhaps give us some idea of how 6 this developed? 7 We understood that the lands, prior to -- 8 prior to the treaty were communal lands. Nobody had 9 fences, nobody wanted fences and -- so the lands were 10 operated -- were owned by the community; is that your 11 understanding? 12 A: Well, Indian Affairs, that's how they 13 knew where each family was. So, they gave location 14 tickets on separate parcels of land. 15 Q: I see, so it was an Indian 16 Affairs/Canada invention? 17 A: Yes. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, the meeting back in July of 1993 22 -- the meeting at the Offices of the Chiefs of Ontario -- 23 remember that meeting where Gordie Peters was involved in 24 attempts to sort of hammer out a working agreement 25 between Kettle and Stoney?
1231 A: Yes. 2 Q: Yeah. I'm going to just go down some 3 names and perhaps you can tell me whether or not these 4 people were part of the Stoney Point group following your 5 leadership or the Kettle Point group following the 6 leadership of Chief Tom Bressette. 7 This is Document Number 9000028 and I 8 think it will put up. 9 Now, this is a list, it is headed, 11:30 10 a.m. list of Stoney Point Members in Attendance at 11 Meeting in Toronto, Ontario, July 22, 1993. 12 "Robert George" -- that would be Robert 13 George Sr., Nobby? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: "Ann Stevens" -- Joanne Stevens 16 (phonetic), do you recognize that name? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: "Roy George" 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: "Noreen..." 21 A: Kowegic? 22 Q: "Kowegic" 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: "Pearl George" 25 A: Yes.
1241 Q: "Roberta George" 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: "Barbara George" 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: "Sheila Nippin (phonetic)" 6 A: Yeah. Yes. 7 Q: "Sheila George" 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: "Frank Joseph". Can you recognize 10 that name? Ferron (phonetic) Joseph? 11 A: A lot of the young guys, I -- I can't 12 recall their right names. 13 Q: Are you sure they're still young? 14 "Sandra Bressette" 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: "Selena Henry" 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: "Stacy Ramsay" 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: "Deborah J. Bressette" 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: "James B. Bressette" 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: "R. Janet Cloud" 25 A: Yes.
1251 Q: "Brenda J. George" 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: "Hubert R. George" 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Is that Lawrence P. George? Can you 6 recognize that one? 7 A: I don't know who that one is. 8 Q: Okay. 9 "Terrence -- Terrence George" 10 A: Oh, yes, yes. 11 Q: And then, "Martin Kewageshig" 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: "Hubert George" 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: "John George" 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: "Gord Cloud" 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: "Glenn George" 20 A: And that one looks like, "Maynard T. 21 George". 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And, "Ron George" 24 A: No. 25 Q: Now, these were people who were a
1261 part of your team attempting to negotiate with the Kettle 2 Point Chief and Council? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Yeah. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: Oh, yes, please. Can you have this 9 document marked as the next exhibit, please? 10 THE REGISTRAR: P-205. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-205. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-205: Document No. 9000028, July 14 22/'93 list Of Stoney Point 15 Members in Attendance at 16 Meeting in Toronto 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 19 Q: Now, Mr. George, with respect to the 20 surrender or the so-called surrender of 1928, there's 21 been evidence to suggest that all persons entitled to 22 vote in the surrender did not vote. 23 Was this your understanding? 24 A: That's right. 25 Q: Would it be fair to say then that you
1271 and your followers took the position that the surrender 2 was bad -- 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: -- And Canada should not have 5 accepted it? 6 A: That's right. 7 Q: And so that when you moved on -- when 8 you and your people moved on to the lands at Aazhoodena, 9 with Canada having accepted a questionable surrender and 10 lands having been transferred to the Province of Ontario. 11 Is it fair to say that the stage was then 12 set for certain kinds of problems. 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Unless people could get together and 15 really negotiate as solution? 16 A: That's right. 17 Q: Would it be fair then to say -- would 18 it be correct if I classified that in your view would I 19 be wrong to conclude that the entire situation, the 20 problems which developed, which culminated in the -- in 21 the violence of September 1995 was by and large stage 22 managed by the Crown? 23 A: I don't know if it was staged or not. 24 Q: No. I did not suggest that it was 25 staged that they came in and staged it, but the entire
1281 management was something that was left up to the Crown? 2 A: Oh, yes. 3 Q: Now let me just take you quickly to 4 the helicopter incident. Apart from you and Nobby 5 George, the only names that we've so far was Abe, which 6 we understand from you who fired at the -- who fired a 7 shot that night -- 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: -- and Nobby who spoke to you about 10 it and yourself. Now, these are the only three (3) -- I 11 take it then that there was no big discussion. There was 12 no gathering up the people to -- to address anything with 13 Abe. It was a quiet gathering just to deal with what you 14 understood to be a problem. 15 A: Yes, that's right. 16 Q: And as far as the situation through 17 1993 and 1994 and the first part of 1995, is it fair to 18 say things remained fairly stable and there was no real 19 need for any high level policing involvement either from 20 Kettle Point or from the OPP? 21 A: That's right. 22 Q: And then there was mention, you 23 mentioned Mr. Simon, which one, one of the Simon brothers 24 having a rifle. Was that Kevin or Marlin? 25 A: I think it's Marlin. I think he's
1291 the oldest one. 2 Q: Yeah, Marlin having a rifle and that 3 he used to do -- to go deer hunting. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Now, prior to moving onto the range 6 in 1993, do you remember whether or not there was any 7 deer hunting at IR-43 which later became Aazhoodena? 8 A: There was always hunting in there. 9 Q: Precisely. So, as a matter of fact, 10 a rifle and hunting had nothing to do with the 11 occupation? It was happening before and it happened 12 after the occupation? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Now, Mr. George, sorry, Mr. Tolsma, 15 and my apologies for calling you Mr. George from time to 16 time. I've been trained to do that by you over the 17 years. 18 So, tell me now something, Mr. Tolsma, as 19 far as -- as far as Indian Affairs -- Canada Indian 20 Affairs is concerned, you were aware that they had a band 21 separation policy, weren't you, a policy for creating new 22 bands? 23 A: Oh, yes. 24 Q: And if this had been employed in 1993 25 it will be simply following the desire of a large number
1301 of people to form their own band? And getting a -- 2 negotiating with Kettle and -- with the chief and Council 3 of Kettle and Stony Point? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And that was not done by Canada? 6 A: I knew there was -- well we knew 7 there was a -- it could be done but Indian Affairs said 8 that they didn't have the money to create a new band. 9 Q: I see. So, as I understand it they'd 10 taken your land, they contaminated the land so you can't 11 go back, they don't clean it up, the person who later 12 became prime minister of this country in 1973 is saying, 13 Give these people back their land otherwise there could 14 be problems. 15 And then they say they don't have any 16 money to create you a new band. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. Now, there's another thing 19 that I wanted to ask you about. This concept of the 20 warrior society, we've had evidence to the affect that a 21 warrior society is not necessarily a society that has any 22 militancy to it. 23 Is this your understanding also? 24 A: My understanding of the warrior 25 society is if you need them, they would be there to
1311 support and it doesn't matter what situation. 2 But, like I said before, Cecil Bernard 3 George and myself went to Six Nations and we went to the 4 Chiefs Confederacy and thanked them for their help and at 5 that time we said we'd like to get on with, you know, our 6 lives and asked them to pull whatever warriors they had 7 in there or that was coming, to pull them out and they 8 agreed. 9 Q: Yeah. But, even as far as the 10 warriors themselves were concerned, the fact that they 11 were warriors did not mean that they had to have 12 accompanying violence -- 13 A: Oh, no -- 14 Q: -- that's my point. 15 A: -- no. 16 Q: Would you agree with me that there's 17 a big gap in your understanding of warriors and what 18 appears to be the understanding of the dominant society 19 about warriors? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: So, a part of this is an education 22 process. People have got to understand that you don't 23 want the Knights of Columbus, you don't want Kiwanis, you 24 don't want warriors, sorry, rotary. 25 And if you've got warriors, it's just an
1321 association for First Nations people? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Yeah. Now as far as the lands are 4 concerned, the lands of Aazhoodena, now there's been a 5 lot of evidence that people -- that members of the Stoney 6 Point group and the Aazhoodena have got a connection, a 7 historic connection to the land because it was unceded 8 and they see it as their home. 9 Is this a part of your understanding? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Yeah. So, that in the event that it 12 is contaminated, it -- would it be fair to say, then, 13 that you would prefer to see it stay as Indian lands 14 until it's cleaned up, regardless to what other 15 accommodation is provided in the meantime? 16 A: Well, I'd like to see it returned, 17 yes, and if it cannot be cleaned up, left as a wild 18 preserve and other lands provided. 19 Q: But, returned? 20 A: But returned, yes. 21 Q: Yeah. And as far as returned is 22 concerned, is it fair to say that you would expect that 23 the Federal Government, (a) would do what is in their 24 immediate capacity to return what was the base? 25 A: Yes.
1331 Q: And go further and do whatever is 2 necessary to deal with the Province for the turn over of 3 what was the Park? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And to go and deal further with the 6 cottage owners in the northeast corner, to buy them out 7 or whatever, so that at least you've got that small area 8 of land which was unceded back in 1927? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Okay. Thank you very much, Mr. 11 Tolsma, those are my questions. 12 Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 14 very much, Mr. Ross. 15 Mr. Henderson...? 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Thank you, 20 Commissioner. 21 22 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 23 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Tolsma. 24 A: Good afternoon. 25 Q: My name's Bill Henderson and Mr.
1341 George and I represent the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony 2 Point. 3 I want to start off with -- with a -- an 4 observation that you made or shared with My Friend Mr 5 Ross and you talked about before the appropriation of the 6 Stoney Point reserve, how the two (2) communities got 7 along so well and people would come up to Kettle Point on 8 Sunday, I think you said, and everybody would shake hands 9 and everything was going on very well, correct? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Now, the two (2) communities or the 12 two (2) reserves, by that point had been in existence for 13 over a hundred (100) years. 14 Now, I take it that over the course of a 15 hundred (100) years, to your understanding, there had 16 been not only a lot of visiting back and forth between 17 the two (2) communities, but a lot of intermarriage back 18 and forth between the two (2) communities? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: So, that when people would visit 21 Kettle Point, they were not just visiting their friends 22 at the neighbouring reserve, they were also visiting 23 family members? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And people at Kettle Point, prior to
1351 the appropriation, there were people at Kettle Point who, 2 in fact, owned land and wood lots and other parcels of 3 land, or had location tickets -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- at Stony Point? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Now, when former chief Yvonne or 8 Bonnie Bressette was testifying before the Commission, 9 she estimated that almost three-quarters of the total 10 population of the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony Point 11 have some ancestral connection to the land at Stoney 12 Point. 13 Could you comment on that? 14 A: Through the intermarriages, through 15 the years, yes. 16 Q: And through the inheritances, et 17 cetera? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Now, when Mr. Ross was stating -- or 20 giving you various propositions in -- with regard to the 21 -- the people who made up the Stoney Point Group -- 22 A: Yes? 23 Q: -- one (1) of the things that I 24 believe you said was that the Stoney Point group was the 25 people who were removed from Stoney Point and their
1361 descendants; is that correct? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And when he took you through some 4 comments that Mr. Glen George had -- had made at a 5 meeting at -- at some point if, indeed, that was -- those 6 were minutes. I don't know, Commissioner, where it came 7 from or -- or whether it's an exhibit or not, but you'll 8 -- you'll recall the document -- 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: -- that Mr. Ross took you through and 11 the description there was that the Stoney Pointers were 12 the people who lost land; is that correct? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Now, as I understand it, those are 15 not the same groups of people, necessarily. There were 16 people who were living there in Stoney Point in 1942 and 17 who were physically removed, including your mother, 18 right? 19 A: There was -- the people that I think 20 they were referring to was the elders as they were 21 children back -- back then -- 22 Q: Hmm hmm? 23 A: -- and they were uprooted. 24 Q: Yes? 25 A: That's -- that's what I understand.
1371 I know there was a lot of people that owned land there, 2 but they didn't live there. 3 Q: Yes. I think that's the point that 4 I'm making -- 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: -- is that -- and -- and if you'll 7 agree with me, there were people who were physically 8 removed -- 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: -- because they were physically 11 living at Kettle Point in 1942. There are people who, of 12 course, are descended from them and there are other 13 people who owned or had location tickets at Stoney Point, 14 but actually they didn't live there. 15 A: That's right. 16 Q: They used those lands as wood lots or 17 for other purposes. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: So there were -- there's a much 20 larger group of people who actually lost land and their 21 descendants? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And, of course, any number of people 24 who were in both groups -- 25 A: Yes.
1381 Q: -- who have one (1) ancestor who -- 2 who lost land and another who lived there. 3 A: Hmm hmm. 4 Q: Thank you. Now, when Mr. -- I'm 5 sorry, it wasn't Mr. Ross, it was Ms. Vella, was asking 6 you about the relationship between the Stoney Point Group 7 and Mr. Ron George, she asked whether or not Mr. George 8 was retained as a lawyer for the group. 9 Do you recall her asking that? 10 A: Yeah, I recall it -- that. I think 11 he was -- he was there just to give us legal advice, I 12 believe. 13 Q: Yes. In fact I think we have a 14 document we can flash up that would assist you. It'll be 15 on the screen there in a moment. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: Now this is -- the document, in fact 20 that -- that Ms. Vella showed you was dated September the 21 17th, 1993. You'll recall it was a letter to -- to then 22 Chief Bressette. This letter is May the 3rd, 1994. It's 23 a letter of introduction to the local member of 24 parliament, Ms. Rose Marie Ur, and it says: 25 "We are -- it was good to see you."
1391 in the first line. The second paragraph: 2 "We wish to advise that we have two (2) 3 legal advisors working on behalf of the 4 Stoney Point First Nation Number 43. 5 Their names are; 6 Ronald C. George" 7 And the address is given and below that: 8 "Mr. E. Anthony Ross" 9 Whose address is also given and you'll 10 note that the letter is signed by yourself, I believe; is 11 that correct? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And apparently by Glenn George as 14 well. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Thank you. So, at least as of this 17 date and as of some earlier date, apparently you had both 18 Mr. Ross and Mr. Ronald George working as legal advisors 19 or as you say giving you legal advice? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Thank you. Yes, Commissioner, could 22 we make that the next exhibit? 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The next 24 exhibit. 25 THE REGISTRAR: P-206.
1401 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-206. 2 3 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-206: Document No. 9000253 May 4 3/'94 letter to Rosemary Ur, 5 MP from Stoney Point First 6 Nation No. 43 signed by Carl 7 George, Chief and Glenn M. 8 George, Councillor re: 9 letter of introduction and 10 authorization advising that 11 Ronald C. George and E. 12 Anthony Ross are the legal 13 advisers working on behalf of 14 The Stoney Point First Nation 15 No. 43. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON. 18 Q: Now, just coming back to the earlier 19 document, I don't think we need to go to it that Ms. 20 Vella referred you to. That was dated September the 21 17th, 1993. That's the one that was on Mr. George's 22 letterhead. 23 Perhaps we should -- we'll that up for you 24 in just a second. 25
1411 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: Yes, that's it. If I -- if I could 4 see the top of the letter please? 5 There we are. And it indicates it's from 6 the Ronald C. George Law Office. And in the smaller 7 printing to the left at the top it says Ronald C. George, 8 VALLB, Barrister and Solicitor. You see those things? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: You're -- you were aware of this 11 letter when it was sent at the time? 12 A: Vaguely remember it, yes. 13 Q: Hmm hmm. And you knew that Mr. 14 George was sending out the correspondence as -- as a 15 lawyer? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And if we come down to I think the 18 second last paragraph and the last paragraph, you'll see 19 that in the second last paragraph, it says, 20 "Chief George..." 21 I believe that's referring to yourself? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: "...and the Stony Point leadership 24 are very much open to the continued 25 pursuit of a resolution et cetera."
1421 And in that regard I take it he is 2 referring to the fact that he is representing both you 3 and the leadership of the group." 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And when he gets to the bottom it 6 says, "our client". 7 And it never caught your eye or your 8 attention that -- that you were being referred to in the 9 capacity of a client or that Mr. George was holding 10 himself out as your lawyer? That was no problem? 11 A: That's no problem, no. 12 Q: Thank you. 13 Just for reference, Commissioner, that's 14 Exhibit P-198. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Going back just a little further now 19 to May 19th of 1993, Mr. George, and on that occasion or 20 on or about that date, you attended with Maynard T. 21 George at Ipperwash Provincial Park? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And you met with Mr. Kobayashi? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And you presented him with a document
1431 which I believe Ms. Vella showed you in your examination 2 in-chief and for My Friends it's Tab 9 in the book in 3 front of you. 4 It's Document Number 1000-64-50 and I 5 believe it is Exhibit Number -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 171. 7 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 171. Thank you. 8 Yes, we have that there now. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 11 Q: I wonder if we could go to -- you 12 remember this document and you remember reviewing it with 13 Ms. Vella? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: If we could go to the second page 16 please. And there's a number of points there that you 17 had discussed and the proposal for a short term 18 agreement. If we can just go down to the paragraph below 19 that. You see at the bottom there's a paragraph that 20 starts with, "Further". 21 And at the bottom line it says, "Without 22 Prejudice"? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Okay. Now the line right after that, 25 I don't think Ms. Vella referred you to. But it says:
1441 "Some of the lands within Ipperwash 2 Park are sacred burial grounds. These 3 areas must be recorded and documented 4 by our First Nation structure." 5 Do you recall that? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: That being in this document? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: So, your evidence is that as of May 10 19th, 1993 at the latest, you personally communicated to 11 the Province, to an official of the Province of Ontario 12 that there was a burial ground in Ipperwash Provincial 13 Park and that it needed to be identified, recorded and 14 documented? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Thank you. Back just a little 17 further, in 1992 there was an election for chief and 18 council at Kettle and Stony Point; do you recall that? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: My information is that in the course 21 of that election, there were three (3) candidates who 22 actively campaigned as Stoney Pointers, representing the 23 Stoney Point agenda, and that in fact they were elected; 24 is that -- is that your recollection? 25
1451 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: Perhaps it would assist you if I -- 4 if I give you the names of the individuals. Gerald 5 George, Ronald George and Maynard T. George. 6 A: Oh, yeah, I remember that. 7 Q: Okay. Do you wish to tell the 8 Commissioner more about -- about that campaign or -- 9 A: I'm just laughing because Maynard -- 10 Maynard was running and he had big ideas and big 11 promises, that's all. 12 Q: But he did get elected, as many do, 13 with similar platforms? 14 A: Yes. Definitely that's -- 15 Q: And just to go back one more step, 16 when Ms. Vella was asking you about an incident in which 17 you were charged for fishing out on Lake Huron. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: You indicated that the charges had 20 been dropped. In fact, was there not a trial and that 21 you were acquitted on the basis of -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- the recognized treaty right to 24 fish in those waters? 25 A: Yes.
1461 Q: Fine, thank you, Mr. George. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 3 Mr. Henderson. 4 Do the Chiefs of Ontario have any 5 examination? 6 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: No, we have no 7 questions. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No? Does 9 Aboriginal Legal Services have any? 10 No? Thank you. Next then is the Ontario 11 Provincial Police. Ms. Tuck-Jackson...? 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Good afternoon, 16 Mr. Commissioner. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 18 afternoon. 19 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 21 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Tolsma. As the 22 Commissioner has indicated, my name is Andrea Tuck- 23 Jackson and I'm going to ask you some questions this 24 afternoon on behalf of the OPP. 25 And I'd like to, if I may, return to a
1471 comment that you made on February 9th, in particular 2 about the relationship that you enjoyed with the OPP 3 during the period from May 1993 until you stepped aside 4 as either the chief or the spokesperson on behalf of your 5 people. 6 And you indicated that John Carson was one 7 of the individuals from the OPP with whom you dealt 8 between 1993 and 1995; do I have that correct? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And you testified, as I said on the 11 last occasion, that you believed you enjoyed a good 12 relationship with the OPP during that approximately two 13 (2) year period? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And I trust, sir, that John Carson 16 was one of the officers who, indeed, left you with the 17 impression that you enjoyed a good relationship with the 18 OPP? 19 A: If I can explain a little bit, yes, 20 that's half right. Until a little bit later on when we 21 were, doing the raid, and if I remember correctly, it was 22 him that was -- I was talking to and like I said, we -- 23 we had our documents in the what they call the argument 24 hall and there was a lot of people out on the highway 25 along with Tom Bressette and some of the councillors, and
1481 he asked me who those people were and I was telling him 2 and at the same time I was trying to turn around and look 3 to see what the other officers were doing. 4 And they were taking pictures of documents 5 and at the same time, Carson was trying to ask me -- get 6 my attention to focus on the highway, who was out there, 7 while these other one -- other officers were taking 8 pictures of our documents. 9 To me, that was like you're trying to keep 10 me busy while the other officers done what -- what they 11 wanted, got their pictures what they wanted and that was 12 kind of a let down for me. 13 Q: Well, let me address that, sir, in 14 two (2) respects. You're telling us now that the person 15 with whom you had a conversation, the nature you've just 16 described, you believe to be John Carson? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: I anticipate that we'll hear, sir, 19 that John Carson wasn't present during the execution of 20 that -- 21 A: Well, I -- 22 Q: -- search warrant. 23 A: -- just figured it was. 24 Q: All right. So you may be mistaken as 25 to the identity of the person with whom you were
1491 speaking? 2 A: Yes, I guess I did. 3 Q: All right. Apart from that, and I 4 anticipate that we're going to hear from a number, if not 5 all of the officers who did participate in the execution 6 of that warrant, and I anticipate that we're going to 7 hear that no photographs were taken of any such documents 8 inside that building, and particularly any of these 9 documents that -- that you considered were beyond the 10 proper scope of the warrant and -- 11 A: Well -- 12 Q: -- shouldn't be examined. 13 A: -- they can say what they want to 14 say, but I have eyes in my head. I seen what I seen and 15 there's a lot of other people that was there too and they 16 seen it. 17 Q: And is it your evidence, sir, that in 18 addition to actually photographing the documents that 19 they took some of the documents with them? 20 A: I said they took pictures of them. 21 Q: I appreciate that -- 22 A: I didn't say they took -- 23 Q: And I'm seeking to clarify -- 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: Are you also suggesting that they
1501 took them and I guess your answer to me is no, they did 2 not take any of the documents with them? 3 A: They didn't take any documents with 4 them that I was aware of. 5 Q: All right. Apart from what you've 6 just described, would it be fair to say that throughout 7 your two (2) year relationship with John Carson in 8 particular, when you met with him from time to time, and 9 I'm going to go over those occasions when the two (2) of 10 you would meet, apart from thinking that John Carson was 11 somehow involved in this discussion with you at argument 12 hall on August the 24th, 1993, you'd agree with me that 13 he left you with the impression that you enjoyed a good 14 relationship with the OPP? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Okay. And I trust, sir, that you'd 17 agree with me that at no time between the point when you 18 and fellow Stoney Pointers entered the rifle range area, 19 on May 6th, 1993, and the time that you withdrew as a 20 leader or spokesperson in 1995, at no time during that 21 period, did the OPP attempt to oust you and the 22 occupiers -- 23 A: No. 24 Q: -- from that area? 25 A: No.
1511 Q: You'd agree with that? 2 A: I agree with that. 3 Q: Thank you. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Now, I wanted to follow up on a point 8 that My Friend, Mr. Ross, made with you. And Mr. Ross 9 put to you that in the current moment, having regard to 10 conflict that had -- has existed between the Stoney Point 11 and the Kettle Point community, it would be unwise for 12 the Kettle Point police to be policing the Stoney 13 Pointers in the area formerly known as Camp Ipperwash and 14 Ipperwash Provincial Park. 15 You recall that he just had that exchange 16 with you? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And before addressing your mind to 19 the current situation, I gather that you addressed your 20 mind to the situation as it was in 1993 and 1995 and 21 whether, at that time, it would have been a wise choice 22 to have the Kettle and Stony Point police policing the 23 occupiers? 24 A: It probably would have been better 25 after a while, yes.
1521 Q: After a while? 2 A: After a certain amount of time, 3 because there was a lot of people there that, I don't 4 know, just didn't agree with it, because they kept 5 changing their mind. 6 I'm just trying to go back and think of 7 what they felt because it wasn't up to me. It was up to 8 the people that was in there what they wanted. 9 Q: Right. 10 A: And if they said no that's the way it 11 was. And if they said yes, that's what I went on. 12 Q: You'd agree with me, sir, that at no 13 time did any of the people who were occupying that land 14 suggest to you that they'd prefer that it was the Kettle 15 and Stony Point Police that would be policing them? 16 A: A few of them did, yes, not all of 17 them. 18 Q: So the consensus was that they did 19 not want the Kettle and Stony Point Police policing them? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Okay, thank you. And that was during 22 the period from 1993 to 1995 when you were the Chief or 23 the spokesperson? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Thank you. All right. I want to
1531 move on if I can, then, to the times when I understand 2 that you actually had direct contact with John Carson and 3 I anticipate that we're going to hear from Deputy Carson 4 that there were approximately four (4) occasions when he 5 had direct contact with you, largely in 1993 as a matter 6 of fact and we've already heard -- and I want to deal 7 with the first three (3) incidents first, because the 8 fourth occasion relates to the helicopter shooting and I 9 want to deal with that a little bit down the piece. 10 You've already spoken of the first 11 occasion and that was on the morning of May the 6th, 1993 12 when you indicated that you dropped by the Forest 13 Detachment and you met with John Carson, I'm going to 14 suggest, at around 9:30 in the morning? 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Does that ring a bell? 19 A: I can't remember it. 20 Q: I anticipate, sir, that -- that 21 Deputy Carson will indicate that you came by Forest 22 Detachment around 9:30, that you advised that 23 approximately twelve (12) First Nations persons would be 24 occupying CFB Ipperwash and that that would be occurring 25 until the land claim was settled.
1541 Does that refresh your memory? 2 A: Yeah, yeah. 3 Q: That would be the type of information 4 that would be conveyed -- 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: -- by you to him? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: All right. I further understand and 9 anticipate that he's going to testify that you had told 10 him that you and your colleagues were going to be 11 proceeding to the -- the base, essentially right after 12 you were leaving him; correct? 13 A: No. I don't recall that part. 14 Q: You didn't advise him that you'd be 15 proceeding to the base after you left him? 16 A: No. 17 Q: But you'd agree with me that indeed 18 you did enter the Base on May the 6th, 1993? 19 A: We had to enter the Base to get back 20 to the -- the rifle range. 21 Q: Oh, I'm sor -- you know what, we're 22 quibbling over words. What -- what I meant and what I 23 anticipate what was understood to mean the Base, was the 24 land in general, not a particular part or corner of the 25 Base.
1551 A: Oh, okay. 2 Q: Okay. So you agree that you told him 3 that you would be proceeding to that area of land shortly 4 after leaving him? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Right, okay. And that -- I'm going 7 to suggest that you told him that it would be a peaceful 8 entry onto the Base? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And that you further told him that it 11 was going to be a peaceful occupation of the Base. 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And that no outside involvement was 14 expected? 15 A: That's right. 16 Q: And by "outside involvement," you're 17 referring to what? 18 A: Any kind of a group that wanted to 19 come in. It could have been anybody, any group. 20 Q: And I trust -- 21 A: I'm not particularly pointing out 22 certain ones, but I just meant anyone in general. 23 Q: And I trust, sir, the reason that you 24 wanted to ensure that there were no outside groups coming 25 in, is that you wanted to maintain a certain degree of
1561 control over the behaviour of the people that were there? 2 A: That's right. 3 Q: All right. Now, I anticipate that 4 we're going to hear that the second occasion when Deputy 5 Carson had direct contact with you was on May the 22nd, 6 1993, so several weeks after your initial entry onto 7 Stoney Point area. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 Q: In front of you in your binder, if 12 you turn to Tab 15, you'll see a letter, it has been 13 marked as Exhibit P-176 in these proceedings. It's a 14 letter dated May the 23rd, 1993 authored by then 15 Inspector Carson. And My Friend Ms. Vella took you 16 through the content of that letter back on February the 17 9th. 18 And I anticipate that we're going to hear, 19 sir, and I'll pause just to give you a moment to re-read 20 the letter. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 A: I remember the -- just go ahead and 25 ask your question then.
1571 Q: Okay. I anticipate that Deputy 2 Carson is going to testify that on the day before that 3 letter was written on May the 22nd, he received a phone 4 call from an officer by the name of Beacock. 5 Do you know -- did you know an Officer 6 Beacock? 7 A: It kind of rings a bell. 8 Q: Okay. And that Beacock in turn had 9 received a call from a Captain Rick Dodson. Does that 10 name ring a bell from the base? 11 A: Rick Dodson. Yes. 12 Q: Oh, actually he was from -- he was 13 from London actually so you may not have know him. 14 A: I recall the name. 15 Q: You may have met with him at one 16 point. 17 A: I heard -- heard the name, yeah. I 18 could have. 19 Q: All right. And the information that 20 ultimately reached the ear of then Inspector Carson, was 21 that Scott Ewert had served a notice that checkpoints, he 22 had served a notice on the military that checkpoints 23 would be set up around the built-up area of the base and 24 that all persons, including military personnel, would be 25 subject to those checks.
1581 Now in your evidence, back on February the 2 9th, you didn't seem to have a recollection of this 3 occurring, and in fairness, it sounds like from a variety 4 of the things that you've said that Maynard T. was doing 5 certain things that you did not have full knowledge of. 6 A: That's -- yes, that's fair to say. 7 Q: Okay. Because I anticipate that 8 later that night on May the 22nd, shortly after 9:00 p.m. 9 as a matter of fact, Inspector Carson came by and spoke 10 with you about this notice along with Officer Beacock. 11 And again, you -- it's been a long time 12 ago, you may or may not recall this. 13 A: I don't recall it but referring to 14 this letter I still can't -- I try to think of it when I 15 was at home but I just -- I can't recall anything about 16 this letter. 17 Q: All right. Let me -- let me refer 18 you to what I anticipate Deputy Carson will testify to 19 and we'll see if that refreshes your memory in any way. 20 I understand or anticipate that he'll say that you told 21 him that the feds were coming to Kettle Point on Tuesday 22 to the community centre and that they, they meaning the 23 feds, I gather someone from the federal government, would 24 have to come to the camp to see you. 25 Does that assist in any way?
1591 A: No, sorry. 2 Q: Okay. And that during the course of 3 your discussion, with then Inspector Carson, you 4 indicated that the major issue for you and for the people 5 there, was that they must be recognized as a separate 6 band and Tom Bressette was not helping. 7 Does that sound familiar. 8 A: Sorry, it doesn't. 9 Q: All right, I'll keep going. Again, 10 in fairness to you, this is a very long time ago. I 11 further anticipate that Deputy Carson will say that he 12 asked you about the campers. When asked about the 13 campers set up along the shooting range, you indicated 14 that the people need privacy and that you had no control 15 to stop them from camping where they want. 16 Do you recall any discussion about the 17 campers moving away from the southeast corner of the 18 military base? 19 A: Yes, I have a little recoll -- 20 talking about that. 21 Q: You do recall talking about that? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Okay, and that you had indicated that 24 you couldn't control where the people went, because if 25 they needed privacy, they were going to spread out over
1601 the land? 2 A: That's right. 3 Q: All right. And I understand that you 4 further advised him that if the Stoney Point band was 5 recognized, you as a group would then start building on 6 the property? 7 Does that sound familiar? 8 A: No, I can't -- that doesn't ring a 9 bell. 10 Q: You certainly don't take issue with 11 the fact that ultimately certain buildings were erected 12 on that land? 13 A: Well, if -- before the CAW helped us 14 build little buildings here and there. 15 Q: That's what I'm getting at. 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. But what you're saying to 18 us, then, is you really don't have much of a recollection 19 of this particular encounter, one way or the other? 20 A: You said campers. 21 Q: Pardon? 22 A: You recalled as campers, didn't you? 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You used the 24 word "camper". I think you were referring to a vehicle 25 or a -- no, you were referring --
1611 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Campers -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- to 3 individual -- 4 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: People. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Individuals, 6 okay. 7 THE WITNESS: Well, I thought you meant 8 as people with trailers or campers or stuff like that, 9 not buildings. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 12 Q: Did you not tell us earlier that the 13 labour union assisted in -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: -- in erecting some structures? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. 18 A: But you referred as a camper. That's 19 what I couldn't get straight. 20 Q: Miscommunication, an ongoing theme, 21 but we'll -- I digress. 22 I meant by the individuals, not actual 23 trailers, okay? 24 A: Yes, when they camped they more or 25 less went where their family urgently lived.
1621 Q: All right. And fair to say, we've 2 heard considerable evidence from a variety of the people 3 who actually did come back to their homes. We've heard 4 that they were spread out over the rifle range area and 5 they didn't limit themselves to the very north, or excuse 6 me, southeast corner of -- 7 A: That's right. 8 Q: -- of the base? 9 A: Yes, that's right. 10 Q: Right, okay. All right, well let's 11 move on from the May the 22nd contact, because it doesn't 12 sound like you have a great recollection of what 13 transpired. 14 I want to move on to the third contact 15 that I understand the two (2) of you had and that's in 16 relation to the charging of tolls in what I anticipate 17 we'll hear was in July of 1993 along Matheson Drive. 18 A: Hmm hmm. 19 Q: All right? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Now you've already told us that the 22 purpose, as you understand it, of setting up a toll booth 23 at that location was to get support and attention for 24 your cause. 25 A: Yes.
1631 Q: All right. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: And I anticipate, sir, that we're 6 going to hear from Deputy Carson that on July 17th, 1993 7 he spoke with you at about 4:15 in the afternoon, and 8 again it's a long time ago, I'm not going to expect you 9 to remember a lot of these details, but I want to -- to 10 put to you certain things that I anticipate he's going to 11 say. 12 That he spoke with you at the roadside, 13 that you advised that these actions were the doing of the 14 people; does that sound familiar? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And that he pointed out to you that 17 you have made your point and that there wasn't any need, 18 in other words, to persist and keep going and potentially 19 obstruct the flow of traffic. 20 Do you recall having that conversation? 21 A: Vaguely, yes. 22 Q: All right. So in other words, he 23 left you with the impression that he wanted this to end 24 peacefully without any need for charges because you'd 25 made your point and it was time to move on?
1641 You recall that -- that tenor of the 2 conversation? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Okay. I further anticipate that 5 we're going to hear that you went on into an explanation 6 of land issues which is reasonable in the circumstances-- 7 A: Probably did. 8 Q: Probably did. And then I must say 9 I'm having a bit of trouble with -- with Officer Carson's 10 handwriting, but what it looks like is that: 11 "And that Ipperwash Park..." 12 I think it says, south of County Road 3, 13 but that doesn't make a lot of sense. Do you -- you 14 recall any type of a conversation of the relationship 15 between Ipperwash Park and -- and how it was perceived in 16 that particular area? 17 This may have been a -- a -- part of the 18 conversation where you were making it clear that in your 19 view the Park was part of Stoney Point territory. 20 A: I don't remember exactly where we 21 talked, unless he's referring to when Scott Ewart was 22 there. 23 Q: No, does it -- 24 A: I don't know. 25 Q: It doesn't appear to have anything to
1651 do with -- with -- are you referring to, perhaps, the 2 jurisdictional issue about whether or not Scott Ewart had 3 the jurisdiction to be doing work in that area? 4 A: No, no. 5 Q: No, I didn't think you were. There's 6 a further entry that says something to the effect of, 7 stated, meaning you stated that it looks like, something 8 -- children would be next. 9 Do you happen to recall any kind of a 10 conversation about children -- women and children would 11 be next? We certainly hear that -- 12 A: If it had anything to do with women 13 and children, we wouldn't put them in jeopardy of any 14 kind of a danger or anything like that. 15 Q: I -- I hear that. I anticipate we're 16 going to hear that at one (1) point an elderly woman and 17 a teenager, about twelve (12) to fourteen (14) years of 18 age was -- they were at the road side involved in this 19 incident. Maybe that is -- is a reference -- is what 20 it's referenced to. 21 A: It could be, I don't know. There was 22 quite a few people there. 23 Q: I understand. All right. But, the 24 bottomline, sir, if I could put it that way, is that from 25 you could tell, Officer Carson was trying to work towards
1661 a peaceful end to this which would not result in any type 2 of criminal charges? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Okay. Now, I want to return to a 5 portion of your evidence that you gave on February the 6 9th and it has to do with what I understand was a visit 7 by you and Maynard T. to the Bosanquet Township office on 8 June the 14th, 1993. 9 And if you look at Tab 24 in that binder 10 in front of you, sir, you'll see a letter that is 11 authored by Acting Staff Sgt. Beacock. A copy of it is 12 sent to then Inspector Carson. It's dated June the 11th, 13 1993, but that -- that clearly is some type of a typo 14 because it's clear from the content of the letter that it 15 was written some time after -- either on or after June 16 the 14th. 17 But, in any event, you'll see that there 18 is a reference in the second paragraph by Officer Beacock 19 as follows, and I should indicate for the record that 20 this letter has been marked as Exhibit P-182. The 21 paragraph states: 22 "I was informed that Maynard George and 23 Carl George attended Bosanquet Township 24 office on June 14th, 1993 with large 25 maps indicating land claims from
1671 Ravenswood Road east to Parkhill and 2 north to Goderich with the exception of 3 the village of Grand Bend." 4 Now, when you were last here on February 5 9th, My Friend Ms. Vella asked you if your attendance at 6 the township office amounted to an assertion of a land 7 claim. And you indicated that it did not. 8 A: No. 9 Q: I want to ask you something a little 10 bit different. 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: Would it be fair to say that during 13 your discussions with the people with whom you met at 14 that township office, either you or Maynard T. in your 15 presence suggested that your people would have a valid 16 claim to the land as is described in that second 17 paragraph? 18 A: Would have a valid claim? 19 Q: That you have some type of a right to 20 the land from Ravenswood Road east to Parkhill and north 21 to Goderich with the exception of the Village of Grand 22 Bend? 23 A: No. Because we went there to more or 24 less to find out what kind of information they had on 25 maps.
1681 Q: Right. 2 A: When we first went in there was big 3 maps folded out and different areas marked and we were 4 rushed out of there fairly fast. Like Maynard T. George, 5 he was the one that was looking at them and he said we 6 don't have these maps. He says, I wonder why. 7 And like I said we were rushed out of 8 there fairly quickly and we talked to whoever was in 9 charge at that time I guess. And when we went back in 10 those -- like they were in a big folder like a big book, 11 and when we went back in they were -- they had been 12 removed. 13 And we asked to see them and we were told 14 no. We were there trying to find out -- like originally 15 Stoney Point was in a different location. Like, it's 16 been moved as far as I know -- no, it was moved once as 17 far as I know. 18 Like, the land was kept being cut off, 19 smaller and smaller and smaller. But, that was years 20 ago. But, that wasn't the issue with me. I just wanted 21 to know if -- trying to find out if there was any more 22 information and maps available. And Maynard George he 23 was suggesting there was more information, how fast they 24 rushed us out and took the books away. 25 Q: Is it fair to say from your
1691 experience with Maynard T. that he sometimes would say 2 that your people had claim to a land which expressed an 3 expectation that was entirely unrealistic? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Okay. Is it possible, sir, that 6 during the course of your visit to this township office 7 that Maynard may have said that there was a claim to the 8 land which -- I'm not suggesting you endorsed, but which 9 he may have said and may have been overheard by somebody 10 there? 11 A: Could have. 12 Q: Thank you. I want to turn now to the 13 fourth occasion when I understand you had direct contact 14 with then Inspector Carson and that relates to the very 15 early morning hours of August the 24th, 1993. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: Now, I anticipate that we're going to 20 hear that the two (2) officers that were on Highway 21 21 and whom I understand heard the shot fired at the 22 helicopter will say that the shot was fired around 10:20 23 or thereabouts in the evening. 24 Do you recall at this time when you got 25 the telephone call to leave Kettle Point and head over to
1701 Stoney Point? 2 A: Robert George came and got me that 3 night. 4 Q: All right. I -- I thought I 5 understood that he had called you to say it was necessary 6 to go over. He may have then picked you up. 7 A: He -- he came over and picked me up. 8 Q: So, he just landed on your doorstep 9 and -- and shared with you this news? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. Fair enough. Okay. Do 12 you have any -- any indication or recollection rather at 13 this time when it was that you would arrived at the base? 14 A: When I arrived there? No. 15 Q: I trust it was before midnight? 16 A: Oh, yes. 17 Q: All right. Reasonable to say that it 18 would have been, perhaps, around eleven o'clock at night? 19 A: Yeah, it would be safe to say that, 20 yes. 21 Q: All right. And I trust that we know 22 that you left the base with Nobby George; is that 23 correct? 24 A: That's correct. 25 Q: And fair to say that you left the
1711 base within thirty (30) minutes of your arrival at the 2 base? 3 A: Pretty well, yes. 4 Q: All right, so fair enough, then, that 5 you would have been leaving the base sometime between 6 11:30 and midnight? 7 A: It could have been, yes. 8 Q: Okay. And there's no question that, 9 when you left the base you were leaving in a vehicle that 10 contained the firearm that Nobby George had taken from 11 his brother Abe George? 12 A: That's right. 13 Q: All right. I understand, Mr. Tolsma, 14 that you returned to the base later that same night? 15 A: I could have. 16 Q: Okay. I anticipate, sir, that we're 17 going to hear that not longer after 2:30 in the morning, 18 you actually met with John Carson? 19 A: I probably did. 20 Q: Okay. And I anticipate that we're 21 going to hear from Deputy Carson that, when he met with 22 you, he explained to you that any vehicle leaving the 23 property would have to be checked if the driver wanted to 24 be able to remove the car from the property. 25 A: Yes.
1721 Q: You recall being told that? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: All right. And that if there was any 4 resistance -- 5 A: They'd be arrested. 6 Q: They would be arrested, thank you, 7 because it would be considered, I'm going to suggest he 8 told you, a form of obstruction? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: All right. So, it was clear to you 11 from at least that point, if not earlier, because you may 12 very well have had dealings with another officer even 13 before that, but I'm going to suggest to you that at the 14 very least by 2:30 in the morning, it was clear to you 15 that the police were going to be engaging in a search of 16 the people at Stony Point and their property for any 17 evidence in relation to this incident? 18 A: It could have been. I can't -- like 19 I -- in my mind it was the next morning when I found out 20 about that but -- 21 Q: Well, we're going to get to that, 22 because you're quite right. You did have a meeting the 23 next morning with two (2) other officers. 24 A: Okay. But when you -- as you were 25 reading there, yeah, it does bring a little bit back to
1731 me, because I remember I did come back because someone 2 came to my house and said they could not get back in and 3 that they -- their children were inside and they wanted 4 them out. 5 And there -- and it was Janet -- if I 6 remember right, Janet Cloud's daughter and her children 7 were inside and the only way I could get them out is talk 8 to the police there. 9 And that -- and I had to go in myself to 10 bring the kids out. 11 Q: And was this when it was dark out or 12 during the next -- 13 A: That's when I returned back to the -- 14 the Army camp there. 15 Q: All right, so in all likelihood it's 16 probably some time before 2:30 in the morning that you 17 would have returned? 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: All right. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: I'm also going to take you to what I 24 anticipate will be the evidence of Mark Wright and I -- 25 you recall that you met with Mark Wright the following
1741 morning back at the Forest detachment? 2 Does that ring a bell? 3 A: Yeah, it does, yeah. 4 Q: Okay. And I'm going to suggest to 5 you that it was Mark Wright and another man by the name 6 of Inspector Turner. 7 Do you recall another gentleman being 8 there? 9 A: There probably was but Turner doesn't 10 ring -- ring a bell, no. 11 Q: All right. And I anticipate, sir, 12 that we're going to hear that during that meeting, you 13 were advised that a search warrant was going to be 14 executed at the base? 15 A: Hmm hmm. 16 Q: Does that ring a bell? 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: All right. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: And did you convey to the police at 23 that time and, indeed, I'm going to suggest that you did, 24 that you would notify the people at the Base of this? 25 A: Yes.
1751 Q: And would it be fair to say, sir, 2 that indeed, knowing what was going on during the night 3 and the police activity and the comments of -- of John 4 Carson many hours before that, is it fair to say that 5 during the night that you suggested to the occupiers that 6 in all likelihood there would be a search and that we 7 should cooperate? 8 A: During the night? 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: I never told them anything until next 11 morning. 12 Q: All right. So it was in the morning 13 after you learned definitively that a warrant was going 14 to be executed -- 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: -- that you went back to the Base and 17 you told the individuals that a warrant was going to be 18 executed and that they should cooperate? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: All right. And it'd be fair to say 21 that you told Officer Wright and Officer Turner that you 22 did not expect the police to be given any trouble? 23 A: That's right. 24 Q: Because that was your expectation; 25 would that be fair?
1761 A: Yes. 2 Q: And again, I'm going to suggest to 3 you that you were advised by the police during that 4 morning meeting that any person who obstructed the police 5 during the execution of the warrant would be arrested and 6 removed from the area. 7 A: That's right. 8 Q: And as we've already heard, sir, I'm 9 going to suggest the police ultimately arrived at the 10 Base to execute the warrant at approximately 11:30 in the 11 morning. Does that sound familiar? 12 A: It could have been around that time, 13 I can't remember exactly now. 14 Q: And I'm going to suggest to you, sir, 15 that the meeting that I've just described and gone 16 through with you with Officers Wright and Turner took 17 place about an hour before that? 18 A: I can't remember the exact time. 19 Q: Would you have any reason -- 20 A: It was in the morning. Yes, I -- I 21 understand that, but to be exact time, I can't say. 22 Q: You certainly had enough time to get 23 back and to speak with the various occupiers -- 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: -- to warn them what was coming and
1771 to encourage them to cooperate. 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Mr. Commissioner, I'm about to go on 4 to a very different area and I would prefer not to 5 interrupt that area, would this be an appropriate time 6 for the afternoon break? 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It could be. 8 I was going to go a little longer, but if that suits you, 9 we'll do it now. 10 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Thank you, sir. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll have 12 an afternoon break now for fifteen (15) minutes. 13 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 14 for fifteen (15) minutes. 15 16 --- Upon recessing at 3:32 p.m. 17 --- Upon resuming at 3:50 p.m. 18 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 20 resumed. Please be seated. 21 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Thank you, Mr. 22 Commissioner. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 25 Q: Mr. Tolsma, before I go on and
1781 question you about your accounts to the police for the 2 helicopter shooting, there's one (1) other thing I want 3 to go back to, if I may. 4 You were talking about the police 5 photographing and documentation in the building that is 6 sometimes referred to as the church or Argument Hall 7 during the execution of the search warrant on the 24th of 8 August, '93. 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: All right. I'm going to ask if this 11 refreshes your memory. Do you recall having a 12 conversation with an officer about a Stoney Point list, 13 in other words, a list of Stoney Pointers and that the 14 officer was interested in obtaining a copy of it, but you 15 didn't have a second copy of it so you agreed to have the 16 pages photographed; does that sound familiar? 17 A: No. 18 Q: That doesn't ring a bell? 19 A: No. 20 Q: All right. Let's move on then to 21 your account of the shooting of the helicopter. Now as 22 you already indicated you were not on the base at the 23 time that a shot was fired at the helicopter, correct? 24 A: That's right. 25 Q: And so I'm not going to ask you if
1791 you, like a number of others, heard only one (1) shot 2 fired. So we'll move on. You'd agree with me, sir, that 3 you have not always been truthful in your account to 4 others about the circumstances surrounding the shooting? 5 A: The only time was to protect Abraham 6 George. 7 Q: Well then the answer to my question 8 is -- 9 A: No. 10 Q: -- yes, I would agree I haven't 11 always been truthful? 12 A: Yeah, that's true to say. 13 Q: Okay. You'd agree that when you 14 spoke with Officer Potts on August the 26th, 1993, you 15 knew that he was interested in learning from you anything 16 you might know that would assist him as to who shot at 17 the helicopter, correct? 18 A: Hmm hmm. 19 Q: And you'd agree with me that you did 20 not reveal the fact that you knew who shot at the 21 helicopter? 22 A: Do I agree? Yes, I would agree. 23 Q: And you could have. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: But you chose not to.
1801 A: Yes. 2 Q: And you would agree that you did not 3 reveal what had happened to the firearm that you and 4 Nobby George took away from Abraham George? You didn't 5 tell the police about that? 6 A: No. 7 Q: And you could have? 8 A: I could have had. 9 Q: And you chose not to. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And if you could turn to Tab 32, 12 which is a copy of your written statement that you gave 13 to Officer Potts, it's been marked as Exhibit P-183 in 14 these proceedings. You'll see about half way in and I'm 15 -- I'm looking at the written version and you may have 16 the typed version in front of you. Whatever's easiest 17 for you to look at. 18 You indicate: 19 "I asked if anyone had guns and has 20 took a shot at the helicopter. Robert 21 interjected, We don't want to know." 22 Have I read that correctly? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Now is it your evidence that when you 25 got to the base, you asked if anyone had guns and had
1811 taken a shot at the helicopter? May I trust the answer 2 to that is no. 3 A: When we got to the base, like I said, 4 Robert George came and picked me up. 5 Q: Right. 6 A: And already he said that Abe shot up 7 in the air, he didn't say he shot at the helicopter. But 8 when we got there we asked -- asked him if he shot at the 9 helicopter, he says, Well I shot up in the air. 10 Q: Well let's go back -- 11 A: Is that what -- 12 Q: -- to this. What I want to know from 13 you is whether you asked if anyone had guns and has took 14 -- I guess it's taken a shot at the helicopter? You -- 15 you didn't ask everyone at large whether or not -- 16 A: Oh, no. 17 Q: No. 18 A: Because I'd have to go and knock on 19 every door there -- trailer that was in there. 20 Q: Right. And you already knew from Abe 21 George that he had shot the firearm -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- at a time when the helicopter was 24 close to it; right? 25 A: Yes.
1821 Q: So I'm going to suggest to you there 2 was no need for you to canvas at large whether or not 3 anyone else had shot at the helicopter, right? 4 A: That's right. 5 Q: Right. So when you wrote in your 6 statement, I asked if anyone had guns and had taken a 7 shot at the helicopter, I trust that was untrue? 8 A: I said that in -- in here, yes, I 9 did. 10 Q: And it was untrue? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Right. 13 A: And when you ascribed to Robert 14 George the comment, And we don't want to know, I trust 15 that was also untrue? 16 A: What he said? 17 Q: Right, because no such conversation 18 took place, right? 19 A: If anyone else had weapons, he might 20 have asked Abe. 21 Q: You've claimed in your statement, 22 sir, that Nobby George interjected during a question that 23 you've already told us you never asked, "And we don't 24 want to know." I'm just reading it directly from your 25 statement.
1831 A: Hmm hmm. Yes. 2 Q: And I'm suggesting to you, sir, that 3 wasn't true. Nobby George never said that; right? 4 A: Well, I can't prove it because he's 5 not here no more. 6 Q: So your answer today is that he did 7 say this? 8 A: If it's in his statement I probably 9 did because I probably asked Abe if anyone else had shot 10 at the helicopter, because I -- I wasn't there and I had 11 to ask questions to find out. 12 Q: Right. 13 A: And Robert probably asked if anyone 14 else had weapons and he probably said, Well, I don't want 15 to hear about it. 16 Q: You're recreating it now after the 17 fact. 18 A: Well, that's what could have 19 happened, yes. 20 Q: You can't say with any certainty what 21 happened, can you? 22 A: No, I can't because I was not there. 23 Q: And I'm going to suggest to you 24 because this conversation as you've described it never 25 occurred; right? It doesn't make sense that you'd have
1841 this kind of conversation, Mr. Tolsma, right? 2 A: You mean have that conversation with 3 -- with who? 4 Q: Well, part of the difficulty, sir, is 5 that you don't explain in your statement with whom you're 6 having this conversation. You'd agree with that, 7 correct? 8 A: Who -- who wrote the statement, 9 though? 10 Q: It's your signature on the bottom, 11 isn't it? 12 A: With the officer. He took the 13 statement, right? 14 Q: Well, yes, Officer Potts took it and 15 you signed it at the bottom, did you not? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Right. 18 A: Well, then, I told him about it. 19 Q: So you're now saying that knowing 20 that you're going on the Base, having been told -- 21 A: Okay, what do you want me to say? 22 Q: What I -- 23 A: Like, what you're saying is one (1) 24 thing and you're trying to put two (2) different things 25 here.
1851 Q: What I -- 2 A: I talked to the -- I gave my 3 statement to the officer. Now, I didn't actually say 4 anybody else had weapons there, if that's what you're 5 getting at. 6 Q: No. 7 A: I had asked Abe -- I probably asked 8 him, because I can't remember 100 percent. That was 9 thirteen (13) years ago. 10 Now, I probably asked him if anyone else 11 had weapons or shot at the helicopter and he probably 12 said No and probably Robert George probably asked him if 13 anybody else has weapons and he probably said, I don't 14 want to know. 15 Q: I want you -- 16 A: I can't recall exactly why those 17 things were said. 18 Q: So it's your position that indeed 19 these things were said? 20 A: Well, they probably were, yes. 21 Q: They probably were? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Okay. You'd agree with me, sir, that 24 you lied to the media when you denied knowing who fired a 25 shot?
1861 A: Yes, I did. 2 Q: And you've already told us, sir, that 3 you were not truthful on these occasions when you spoke 4 with the police, when you spoke with the media because 5 you wanted to protect an elder within your community? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: And I'm going to suggest to you, sir, 8 that you were also not truthful about what actually 9 occurred that night because you were fearful of 10 retaliation or retribution from members of your 11 community? 12 A: Is that you saying that or are you 13 asking me that? 14 Q: I'm suggesting to you, sir, that that 15 is another explanation as to why you were untruthful in 16 August of 1993 about what had occurred that night? 17 A: No. 18 Q: You disagree? 19 A: I disagree. 20 Q: Okay. Could we have Document 2004092 21 put up on the screen, please? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: And if you could go in to page 10.
1871 For the benefits of My Friend, I'm referring to a case 2 history that was prepared by Mark Wright. It's Document 3 Number 2004092. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Would you go down a little bit 8 please? To the very last paragraph. 9 You'll see, Mr. Tolsma, this actually is 10 an account, I anticipate we'll hear, of that meeting that 11 occurred on the morning of August the 24th, 1993 before 12 the police commenced the execution of the search warrant. 13 And I anticipate that officer Wright will 14 testify that during his discussion with you that morning, 15 he asked you if you would consider turning the person 16 responsible over to the police in order to avoid the 17 massive search that was about to take place and that you 18 replied that you couldn't because they would hang you, or 19 at least words to that effect. 20 I'm going to suggest to you that you said 21 that to the officers that morning. 22 A: I could have. 23 Q: You could have? 24 A: I could have. 25 Q: Okay.
1881 A: Like I said, I can't remember all 2 these -- everything here. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: I'm also going to suggest to you, 7 sir, that when you spoke with Officers Fox and Mullen 8 (phonetic) in November of 2003, that you expressed a 9 similar sentiment. 10 Now, before we go right to that, you'd 11 agree with me that when you spoke with Officer Andy Fox 12 and Patrick Mullen, on November the 15th, 2003, that was 13 the first time that you disclosed to the police that you 14 knew who shot at the helicopter? 15 A: If I did, again, like I said, I can't 16 remember a lot of these things and if I did, why would I 17 say I know who shot the helicopter when I don't -- 18 Q: Shot -- 19 A: -- think anybody -- shot at the 20 helicopter sounds better. 21 Q: Actually, that's what I said. I 22 think a cough may have interrupted the flow, but I was 23 putting to you that that was the first time you shared 24 with the police that you knew who shot at the 25 helicopter --
1891 A: Okay, yes. 2 Q: You'd agree with that? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: You'd agree with me that this was the 5 first time, also, that you were prepared to identify 6 Abraham George as the person who shot at the helicopter? 7 A: Again, I could have, but I can't -- I 8 don't remember. 9 Q: It's not something that sticks out in 10 your mind? 11 A: No, like I said, I washed my hands of 12 this a long time ago and I just forgot everything. 13 Q: Well, I'm not talking about events 14 that occurred ten (10) or twelve (12) years ago. I'm 15 talking about events that occurred in November of 2003, 16 so about a year and half ago or so, not even that. 17 A: Oh, and let me see now. If you're 18 talking about the guys that I remember, they're two -- 19 and young guys? 20 Q: I'm afraid I can't comment on their 21 age. 22 A: Oh, I -- because the only time I ever 23 met with anyone is when two (2) investigators came to my 24 door. 25 Q: Right, that's the ones I'm talking
1901 about, November of 2003. 2 A: Yes, I remember that, yes. 3 Q: All right. And you told them that 4 you knew who shot at the helicopter. 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And you told them that it was Abe 7 George who was the person who shot at the helicopter -- 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And you told them what happened to 10 the firearm that Abe George used to -- 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: -- shoot at the helicopter? And 13 you'd agree with me that was the first time you shared 14 that piece of information -- 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: -- with the police? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Right. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: Could we have Document 2004107 up on 23 the screen, please? 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)
1911 Q: You recall that you spoke with the 2 officer Andy Fox on November 14th, 2003 and you indicated 3 that you would be prepared to speak to the officer in the 4 presence of the Kettle Point Band office lawyer and Sam 5 George's lawyer. Do you recall saying that? 6 A: I probably did. 7 Q: Okay. And it would appear, sir, that 8 you had an appointment set up for the following day at 9 9:15 or thereabouts? 10 A: Appointment for what? 11 Q: To meet with the officers to discuss 12 with them. 13 A: Well, they came back, yes. 14 Q: Well I'm going to suggest to you, 15 sir, that you actually were to meet with them but they 16 had to in turn track you down at your home when you did 17 not show up for your appointment. 18 Does that sound familiar? 19 A: No. They only came to my place 20 twice. There was two (2) of them. Because I can 21 remember that very clearly because my wife told me she 22 says -- she says, I'm not answering the door because 23 there's Jehovah Witness coming which I said they're not 24 and I said, these are police officers because I know how 25 they dress.
1921 So, I answered the door, so they 2 introduced themselves but they can mention their name to 3 me one day and I can't remember it the next day. 4 Q: That's fair. 5 A: But, they asked me questions and I 6 talked to them the first day and the made an appointment 7 to come back. There was no meeting at the Kettle Point 8 Band office or anything like that. They just asked if 9 they could return and I said yes. 10 Q: And I'm going to get to it in a 11 minute but I'm going to suggest to you that after you 12 initially answered their questions, you actually called 13 them up to cancel that second appointment, right? 14 A: Yes, because I told them at the time 15 I didn't want to be bothered this no more. I washed my 16 hands and I didn't want to be bothered. 17 Q: Okay. Let's -- let's figure out 18 exactly why you told them you didn't want to be bothered 19 with it. If you look up on the screen, sir, and I'm 20 showing you an entry from Officer Fox's notebook 21 referable to November the 15th, 2003. 22 And on the top right hand page it says: 23 "Carl Tolsma answers the front door. 24 Tolsma advises that he doesn't want to 25 be audio taped or sign anything."
1931 Recall being -- told that. 2 A: Yes. They asked me, they said do you 3 -- we could audio tape this or whatever you want. And I 4 said no. I don't want to be taped. 5 Q: And you didn't want to sign anything? 6 A: No. 7 Q: And why was that? 8 A: Because I didn't want to be bothered 9 with it. 10 Q: You see, that's not what you tell the 11 police, sir. If you look at the next line, it says, he 12 is afraid of retribution. 13 Do you recall telling that to the 14 officers? 15 A: Sorry, I don't. 16 Q: You don't? 17 A: Nope. 18 Q: So, they's attributed to you a 19 comment that you never made, is that your evidence? 20 A: Well if that's what they say, then so 21 that's what they want to hear, so be it. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I think that in 23 fairness to the witness we haven't had the officer 24 testify as to what he intended to write down. The 25 statement, he is afraid of retribution, it's not in
1941 quotation marks I note. And this may either have been a 2 statement attributed to the Witness or it may have been 3 an assumption made by the officer. 4 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: No doubt we'll 5 hear from the officer on that. I'm not going to pursue 6 it further, sir. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 10 Q: You'd agree, sir, that the officers 11 wanted to speak with you further and you called them back 12 and indicated that you didn't want to be involved 13 anymore. That was within a day or two of that first 14 meeting. 15 A: That's right. 16 Q: Would it be fair to say that you were 17 concerned that you'd said too much already? 18 A: No. I just didn't want to be 19 bothered with it. Like I said, I washed my hands 20 completely of this and I didn't want to have anything to 21 do with it anymore. When I say I didn't want to have 22 anything to do with it anymore, there was a lot of 23 problems and I done what I had to do and I -- like I 24 said, I washed my hands of it. 25 I just -- I wasn't made out for, you know,
1951 any kind of newspaper release and talking to high 2 officials or anything like that. I done what I had to do 3 and that was it, I was finished. 4 Q: I understand. You told us, sir, on 5 February 9th that to the best of your recollection -- and 6 that was the way you phrased it -- to the best of your 7 recollection and for the benefits of My Friends, I'm 8 referring to page 146 of the transcript. 9 To the best of your recollection, it was a 10 shotgun that was taken from Abe George that night? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Is it possible, sir, that the firearm 13 that was taken from Abe George was not a shotgun but was 14 a rifle? 15 A: Well, I know that different ones said 16 I'm an expert, but when you live on a reserve and you 17 hunt rabbits you know the different between a shotgun and 18 a rifle and a high-powered rifle. And I used a shot gun 19 a number of times when I hunted rabbits. Yes, it was a 20 shotgun. 21 Q: I'm going to put to you, sir, some 22 information to see if it would assist you in either 23 refreshing your memory or potentially changing your 24 evidence, all right? 25 A: Go ahead.
1961 Q: I anticipate, sir, that we're going 2 to hear that in the opinion of a firearms expert, the 3 bullet seized from the helicopter may have been fired 4 from a 27 to 30 calibre centre fire rifle, okay? 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: And would it assist you, sir, to know 7 that Cleve (phonetic) Lincoln Jackson told the police on 8 December the 9th, 2003 that he saw Abe George holding a 9 firearm earlier that same night that the helicopter was 10 shot at and when specifically asked if the firearm was a 11 shotgun, Mr. Jackson replied that it was not a shotgun, 12 it was a rifle. 13 Does that in any way change your evidence, 14 sir? 15 A: How could it? I didn't ask him the 16 questions and what his opinion is his opinion. I only 17 say what I seen and what I asked. I'm not changing 18 nothing. 19 Q: Would it change your evidence in any 20 way to know that on September the 1st, 1993 Abraham 21 George, himself, told the police that at that time he 22 only had one (1) firearm, it was a thirty thirty (30/30) 23 moose gun? 24 A: Well, it's higher -- more higher 25 powered rifle. What we took was a shotgun and like,
1971 okay, while you're saying there was a high-powered rifle 2 from Debster Jackson and then you're saying there was a 3 moose gun. Okay, answer me one (1) question, why didn't 4 this bullet go right straight through the helicopter or 5 did they find the empty lead bullet inside? 6 Q: Sir, I'm not hear to answer 7 questions. 8 A: Well, I'm only telling you -- like, 9 you're trying to make me change my story and I'm not 10 because I know what I seen and I know the difference 11 between a shotgun. 12 Q: Would it in any way affect your 13 evidence, sir, to know that I anticipate we're going to 14 hear that a 22 calibre Magnum live round was found in 15 Abraham George's trailer during -- 16 A: What you find I can't -- I have 17 nothing to do with it. 18 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Hang on, Mr. -- Mr. 19 Tolsma, if you will. I think that this Witness has 20 answered many, many times that he knows what a shotgun 21 is. It doesn't matter what other people may have said 22 and what he saw was a shotgun. 23 Now, there may be other evidence that -- 24 that may draw other inferences, but I think putting to 25 him different types of rifles and asking him if he was
1981 mistaken really is, again to the point of, in my 2 respectful submission, battering -- badgering the 3 Witness. 4 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: The only reason 5 I can indicate, Mr. Commissioner, that I pursued the line 6 of evidence was because Mr. Tolsma's evidence was, to the 7 best of his recollection, and I wanted to give the 8 Witness an opportunity to refresh his recollection to see 9 if his recollection today was any different. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not on this 11 point. On this point he was quite clear what he said. 12 On other matters he used the phrase, "to the best of my 13 recollection." 14 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Actually, sir, 15 I can take you to the transcript. It -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 17 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: It's at page 18 146. I've made my point, sir, and I have no further 19 questions for you, Mr. Tolsma, thank you. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much Ms. Tuck-Jackson. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's quarter
1991 after 4:00. 2 Ms. Jones...? 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We're going 7 to break at five o'clock, so obviously you may be longer 8 than that. But we're going to break at five o'clock. 9 MS. KAREN JONES: We shall see. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. KAREN JONES: 14 Q: Mr. Tolsma, my name's Karen Jones and 15 I'm one of the lawyers for the Ontario Provincial Police 16 Association. 17 Mr. Tolsma, you've been asked a number of 18 questions about the history as between Stoney Point and 19 Kettle and Stony Point and some of the negotiations and 20 things that have happened over the course of time. 21 And one of the things that I wanted to ask 22 you about was I understand that in 1980, there was a 23 payment that was made by the Federal Government to the 24 Kettle and Stony Point Band and -- of about 2.5 million-- 25 A: Yes.
2001 Q: Do you -- do you have any knowledge 2 of that money being paid or -- 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Yeah? Okay. And it appears from 5 documents that we've looked at, that in addition to the 6 $2.5 million that was paid in 1980, that the Kettle and 7 Stony Point Band was also given the mine, mineral and 8 timber rights to the base. 9 Is that right? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And I'm sorry, I -- I get in trouble 12 if I don't ask you to say yes or no, so, thank you. 13 And I understand that that agreement, that 14 is to accept the $2.5 million and the mine, mineral and 15 timber rights was something that was agreed to by the 16 majority of the Band -- 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: That is the Kettle and Stony Point 19 Band. 20 A: You see, they -- they asked at that 21 time they asked for firewood. A lot of people burnt 22 firewood. 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: And we didn't have no other place to 25 cut the wood and so we ask -- they asked the -- whoever
2011 was in charge at the camp and they went to their 2 superiors and they agreed that, yes, it would be good to 3 let us cut the timber in there for firewood. 4 Q: Okay. Can you help us understand 5 what kind of arrangements were made, if you know, between 6 the Kettle and Stony Point Band and the base in terms of 7 when people, for example, could go and cut wood. 8 Was there a -- 9 A: There was -- 10 Q: -- system in place? 11 A: There was a system in place but I 12 don't know exactly like the details, but I know there's 13 only a certain day we could go in. 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: Because that's to -- when they 16 weren't shooting on the firing range and stuff like that. 17 Q: Right, so they would have to be times 18 when it was safe for you to go into the area? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Okay. And if you were someone who 21 was on Kettle and Stony Point area and you wanted to go 22 to the base, would you need to get some kind of approval 23 or some kind of direction from the Band -- 24 A: Yes, you would. 25 Q: -- do that? Okay.
2021 And you've talked a little bit and -- 2 about and you confirmed with Mr. Ross today that I think 3 over the course of time, people from Kettle and Stony 4 Point also hunted at the Base? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Okay. And was that something that 7 was also done by arrangement with the Base, do you know? 8 A: I'm not sure on that one. 9 Q: Okay. And we heard earlier in this 10 Inquiry from another witness that in or about 1980 when 11 the $2.5 million was paid by the Federal Government to 12 the Band, that each Kettle and Stony Point Band member 13 got a thousand dollars ($1000). 14 Do you know whether or not that's 15 accurate? Like, do you have any knowledge about what was 16 paid out? 17 A: Well, the majority of them got a 18 thousand dollars ($1000) and there was others that got 19 eight hundred (800) and others that got five hundred 20 (500). 21 Q: Okay. Do you have -- do you have -- 22 do you have any idea about how those arrangements were 23 made or who figured out who would get what? 24 A: No I don't. I only can speak on my 25 own experience, like my wife. I was a Bill C-31, I was
2031 not a Band member for quite a while. 2 Q: You were a? 3 A: A Bill C-31. 4 Q: Okay. 5 A: And when I married -- 6 Q: Sorry, and I don't mean to interrupt 7 you again. Perhaps you can just explain to us so we all 8 know what a Bill C-31 member is. 9 A: That's when you're allowed back into 10 the Band. You're given the Band status. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: That's why call it Bill C-31. And 13 when I married my wife she lost her membership and it was 14 regained back and at that time she was the only one at 15 that time got money from 1980 and she only received I 16 think it was eight hundred dollars ($800). But, the 17 others I -- I can't say because I don't -- I don't know. 18 Q: Okay. 19 A: It's just hearsay. 20 Q: Okay. Now, in terms of a Stony Point 21 group forming and wanting to take back the land at the 22 Base or more land than that. I understand from looking 23 at the documents that we've been provided by the 24 Commission, that a Stoney Point group of which you were a 25 member, had already started having meetings with the
2041 Department of National Defence back in March of 1993. 2 And what I can do to see if I can give you 3 some assistance here, Mr. Tolsma, is in the document 4 database that we've been provided, there's a document 5 that for the assistance of Counsel, is 4000-407. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: And if you look around behind you, 10 Mr. Tolsma, you'll see that there's a letter up on the 11 screen and at the top it says, Stoney Point First Nation. 12 And that it's dated Sunday, April the 13 4th, 1993 and under the re line it says, Topics of 14 Discussions on March 29th and 30th, 1993. 15 Do you have that document in front of you, 16 Mr. Tolsma? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. And I look at the third page 19 of the document at the bottom, it looks like it's signed 20 by yourself as Chief Carl Otto George and it looks like 21 Maynard Travis George, Researcher, also signed that 22 document. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Yeah. And I wanted to see if we 25 could get some information from you, Mr. Tolsma, as to
2051 when from your knowledge the Stoney Point group or a 2 Stoney Point group first started getting together and 3 talking about dealing with the Department of National 4 Defence as a separate entity as Stoney Point First Nation 5 as opposed to Kettle and Stony Point. 6 A: You say, as separate? 7 Q: Well, I see -- 8 A: Or as -- 9 Q: Yeah, I see -- yeah, I see as of 10 April 4th, 1993 and apparently back in March of 1993, 11 that there was a group or that you were identified as -- 12 A: Hmm hmm? 13 Q: -- the Chief of Stoney Point First 14 Nation. And it looks like from that document, as though 15 you and Maynard T. George and I take it others, would 16 have been having your own discussions as Stoney Point 17 First Nation with the Department of National Defence? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Yeah. And so, I'm just trying to get 20 a bit of history on this thing, Mr. Tolsma, if you can 21 help us understand when you first started coming together 22 in deciding that, first of all, you were Stoney Point 23 First Nation and then second, that you would be dealing 24 with the Department of National Defence as Stoney Point 25 First Nation?
2061 A: It would have been in -- 2 Q: It's just a little historical 3 background. 4 A: It would have been in '93 when we 5 actually started talking with National Defence. Prior to 6 that, there was a lot of meetings with some of the 7 elders. When? I wasn't involved in a lot of them 8 because I wasn't involved in anything at that time. I 9 can't say for sure when it first arose. 10 Q: Okay. 11 A: But mainly I got involved as -- in 12 '93. 13 Q: In 1990 -- 14 A: That's when I -- I decided. So, I 15 can't really say when everything came together, when 16 people started talking. 17 Q: Okay. 18 A: Because I was only involved in -- 19 like -- like, in '93. 20 Q: Okay. And -- and you're right, you 21 can't speak about what other people are doing when you're 22 not involved in something. I was just asking you from 23 your own knowledge and experience when you first became 24 involved with the group that identified itself as Stoney 25 Point First Nation.
2071 A: In '93. 2 Q: In 1993? And at that point in time, 3 as I understand, you were living at Kettle Point? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And how was it that you decided to 6 become part of this group that identified itself as 7 Stoney Point First Nation? 8 A: Okay. Like I explained before, I -- 9 there was different people that went into Camp Ipperwash 10 during the summer. Like, I was working there as -- in 11 the engineers in the winter time and also in the summer 12 time I was working on the bull gang or they call labour 13 crew and I seen -- I can only mention one (1) person 14 because the rest of them I -- I didn't take notice, but 15 one (1) person was Cecil Bernard George. 16 That he made a -- the fire, the sacred 17 fire and I sat around it for three (3) days, three (3) 18 nights. And with me I like to watch peoples' reaction 19 and the reaction of the ones, like, National Defence -- 20 the ones that were in charge, they just went on about 21 their business and more or less, what it told me was that 22 they'll be out of here. Don't bother them, they'll be 23 out of here and we can get back to what we were doing and 24 that's exactly the way I seen it. 25 So, at that time I figured, well, how can
2081 you get their attention? 2 Q: And when you say, how can you get 3 their attention, who? 4 A: National Defence. 5 Q: Okay. 6 A: The Federal Government, Provincial 7 Government. I thought about this for a while and I 8 talked with other ones like Robert George and we talked 9 it over and more people got interested, so we decided 10 that if we went in, they'd just laugh it off and after a 11 while they'd know we weren't going to leave, then they'd 12 start, you know, getting serious, and which exactly 13 happened. 14 Q: Okay. And in that document that's in 15 front of you, which is Exhibit 163, you'll see on the 16 third page of that document under line 20, it says: 17 "Sub 2. Burial yards at Stoney Point 18 recorded. Burial grounds throughout 19 reserve in sand hills." 20 And you've told us a little bit earlier, 21 both in your previous day of testimony and today about 22 seeing a map at some point in time in 1993 you find, that 23 set out the site of burial grounds. 24 When you look at this, does it -- does 25 this assist you in terms of whether or not in April of
2091 1993, that you had -- you had seen that map or had that 2 information from somewhere about burial sites in the 3 Stoney -- 4 A: In the beginning? 5 Q: Yes. 6 A: No, I learnt about it a little after 7 that. 8 Q: Okay. 9 A: Because at that time we were reading 10 a lot of papers. Maynard T. George would go to the -- 11 where they kept all the records. He brought a lot -- 12 quite a few papers back. 13 And in there it spoke about other people 14 how years ago that were talking around about 1943/'45 15 somewhere around in that area, that they were also trying 16 to get the land back and that's where I -- I read about 17 it and I seen like a drawing, a map, that was pointed out 18 where the burial sites were. 19 Q: Okay. And you -- can you help us 20 today with where that letter or where that document is? 21 A: All the papers we had I give to 22 Kettle Point Band Office and if there was any papers left 23 in Argument Hall, I wouldn't know where they are now. 24 Q: Okay. Now, I've listened to you 25 carefully, Mr. Tolsma and I just wanted to see if we
2101 could come up with a list of things that would have to be 2 agreed upon or decided, in order for lands to be turned 3 back to the Band, either the Kettle and Stony Point Band 4 or the Stoney Pointers. 5 And it seems to me that one (1) of the 6 items that has to be decided is the actual land that you 7 want returned, has to be defined. 8 A: Hmm hmm. 9 Q: Yes? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And the second is you have to decide 12 who's going to negotiate for that land. 13 A: Well the Kettle -- the Kettle and 14 Stony Point. 15 Q: No, no, but just in terms of 16 thinking, how would you get land back? 17 A: How would I get it back? 18 Q: Through what -- through a process 19 with the DND and whoever else you need to deal with. The 20 first thing you'd have to do is define the land and 21 you've agreed with that. 22 The second thing is you have to figure out 23 who's going to negotiate for that land -- 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: -- right? And the third thing is you
2111 have to decide who's going to get the land; that is, who 2 is it going to be returned to? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Yeah? And a fourth issue that you've 5 talked very briefly about, is you have to decide who is 6 going to be compensated, who is going to get some 7 financial compensation. 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And the fifth thing, from what you've 10 told us, especially with the land at the Base, is you 11 have to determine who's going to clean up the property -- 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: -- to make sure that it's safe and in 14 a good position to be returned. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Okay. So, what I wanted to do is 17 take you back to 1993, and go through those five (5) 18 items, so that we're clear about what your position in 19 1993 was on them. 20 And the first one was to define the land 21 that should be returned. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And I'm just asking you from your 24 perspective, because we've heard from other people what 25 their perspective is.
2121 And this morning, Ms. Vella took you to a 2 document and I believe that it was from Exhibit 36. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: And what that document was this 7 morning and it is today at Exhibit 36, is it's the 8 proclamation from the Province of Canada. 9 And Ms. Vella took you to a portion of 10 that proclamation that said: 11 "In the Town of Bosanquet in the County 12 of Lambton at Kettle Point in the said 13 township and county bounded on the 14 north and west by Lake Huron and on the 15 south and east by the Lake Road lots 16 and 18th and 19th concessions of the 17 said township of Bosanquet reserved for 18 the occupation of the Chippewa 19 Indians." 20 And then it talks about another piece of 21 land that is being at or near the mouth of the River Aux 22 Sable. And I think you told Ms. Vella yesterday that in 23 your view the other piece or parcel of land, that is the 24 one near the mouth of the River Aux Sable wasn't one that 25 you were pursuing --
2131 A: That's right. 2 Q: -- in 1993. 3 A: That's right. 4 Q: So, we're just talking about the one 5 above that that is at Kettle Point, bounded on the north 6 and west by Lake Huron and south and east by the Lake 7 Road lots. 8 And I listened to you -- I -- I just want 9 to make sure that we understand what that piece of land 10 entails. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 12 Henderson has an observation to make -- objection. 13 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Sorry to 14 interrupt. I've been listening to that description over 15 and over. The description it's bounded on the north and 16 west is the Kettle Point Reserve not the Stoney Point 17 Reserve. It's not the way that it sounds as I read it; 18 am I right? 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What's the 20 document number? 21 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Well, it says at 22 Kettle Point bounded on the north and west which Kettle 23 Point is. It runs like this on the lakeshore. Sorry, 24 you don't catch that gesture. 25 But the water boundaries of the Kettle
2141 Point Reserve at Kettle Point are on the west and the 2 north. 3 Whereas at Stoney Point there's -- you're 4 aware is to the -- the water boundary is to the north 5 only. 6 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That -- I've been 7 concerned about that as well. It would appear to me that 8 the first description of the Kettle Point Reserve lands 9 and the second description by the River Aux Sable were 10 the Stoney Point lands. I was going to try to clear up 11 with Mr. Tolsma later but. 12 MS. KAREN JONES: Well, with a little 13 luck perhaps I can use this opportunity to clear it up. 14 Because the questions and answers didn't make sense in 15 light of the descriptor. So I -- I was hoping actually I 16 could clear it up a little bit. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So, that's 18 exactly what you're trying to do? Okay, proceed. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MS. KAREN JONES. 21 Q: Do you have that document in front of 22 you, Mr. Tolsma? 23 A: Probably do somewhere here. 24 Q: Okay. 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It is Exhibit 195.
2151 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 195? 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, 195. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 195. It's 4 one of the documents that was handed out this morning. 5 MS. KAREN JONES: And I think you'll see 6 that -- there's a covering letter and then there's an 7 attachment to the letter. And that attachment is the 8 proclamation. I'll just give you a minute, Mr. Tolsma, 9 and you can have a look see. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 MS. KAREN JONES: And I think it's -- Ms. 14 Vella, says it's the fourth page of that document. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Vella 16 also said the document -- the pages were out of order a 17 bit. 18 MS. KAREN JONES: They -- they are out of 19 order a bit. That for the purpose of figuring this out, 20 I think even though they're out of order, I think that we 21 can manage. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 CONTINUED BY MS. KAREN JONES:
2161 Q: Okay. Are you on the fourth page of 2 that document, Mr. Tolsma? And what I -- I want to take 3 you to so that we can review it, is the middle of that 4 fourth page, that talks about -- you'll see about two (2) 5 paragraphs down there's an indented paragraph that 6 starts: 7 "In the township of Bosanquet --" 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: "-- in the County of Lambton". 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Do you see that? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And you'll see it says: 14 "At Kettle Point in the said township 15 and county bounded on the north and 16 west by Lake Huron and on the south and 17 east by the Lake Road lots and 18th and 18 19th concessions of the Township of 19 Bosanquet." 20 And I had heard your evidence to Ms. Vella 21 to be that was a descriptor of the Stoney Point land and 22 I could be wrong about that, but it looks to me, and Mr. 23 Henderson has been very helpful as well, as though that 24 section is actually talking about the land at Kettle 25 Point not Stoney Point and I wonder if you can look at
2171 that and based on what you know and understand, if you 2 can tell us whether or not that's accurate. 3 A: So, what's the question you wanted to 4 know about? 5 Q: Okay. The first descriptor, the one 6 that says: 7 "In the county of Bosanquet in the 8 county of Lambton --" 9 And it says that the -- the section that 10 says: "-- at Kettle Point". 11 A: Yes? 12 Q: Do you see that? Do you agree that 13 that's actually a description of the Kettle Point land or 14 the land at Kettle Point? 15 A: That's what it says, yes. 16 Q: Okay. And so if we go down to the 17 next paragraph, you'll see on the left it says: 18 "Reserved for the occupation of the 19 Chippewa Indians, also one (1) other 20 piece or parcel of land as follows 21 being near the mouth of the River Aux 22 Sable by the said township of Bosanquet 23 and county aforesaid, and bounded on 24 the northwest by Lake Huron and on the 25 southeast, northeast, and southwest by
2181 the Lake Road lots and 18th and 19th 2 concessions of the said township of 3 Bosanquet." 4 Now, from your understanding, Mr. Tolsma, 5 is that the description of the Stoney Point -- what's 6 been called the Stoney Point land? As far as you know? 7 A: Well, from what I -- from what I 8 understand about that -- 9 Q: Okay. 10 A: -- is the Stoney Point land -- what I 11 was told and read in documents -- the Stoney Point land 12 originally was at, like on the side of the mouth of the 13 Aux Sable River. 14 There was a parcel of land there and I 15 can't remember exactly how it goes, but it all has to do 16 with Indian Affairs, the agents, and they went in and 17 said, There's nobody here, so at that time they just 18 said, there's nobody here so they took the land and they 19 kept chopping it off short -- smaller and smaller, but 20 that's -- that's what I understand. You'd have to ask 21 somebody more knowledgeable about this than -- than me. 22 Q: Okay. So, in -- in terms of the 23 document we're just looking at, I take it, then, you 24 can't help us whether that second descriptor that is one 25 (1) other piece or parcel of land as follows, being near
2191 the mouth of the River Aux Sable, you can't particularly 2 help us with what that describes, is that right? 3 A: That's right. 4 Q: Okay. And so then we can set that 5 aside and I can ask you in 1993, from your knowledge at 6 that time, what was the land that the Stoney Point First 7 Nation -- what -- what land were you seeking to be 8 returned? 9 A: Where -- which the Army took over. 10 Q: Okay. 11 A: The built-up area where the buildings 12 are and it goes down right to the lakefront. 13 Q: Okay. And in your view or 14 understanding, does that area include the cottage area 15 that's currently at the northeast portion? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: Okay. And in terms of the second 18 question, that is who negotiates for the land? In 1993 19 what was your view; that is, whether Stoney Point First 20 Nation should negotiate for that property, that land; 21 whether Kettle and Stony Point Band should negotiate for 22 that; or whether Stoney Point First Nation and Kettle and 23 Stony Point should do it together. 24 Did you have a view in 1993? 25 A: Well, probably at the time, everybody
2201 wanted to have a say, but in my own opinion the Kettle 2 and Stony Point had the right to negotiate. 3 Q: To be the sole negotiators -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- for that land? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Okay. And in terms of the question, 8 who gets the land, back in 1993 what was your view as to 9 if the land was returned, who would get it? 10 Who would -- who would have it? Was it 11 Kettle and Stony Point Band, was it Stoney Point First 12 Nation, or some mixture of the two (2)? 13 A: It would have to go -- in my 14 understanding it would have to go back to Kettle and 15 Stony Point Band. 16 Q: Okay. And in terms of who gets 17 compensation, back in 1993 was it your view that if there 18 was compensation paid by the federal government, it would 19 go to Kettle and Stony Point Band or Stoney Point First 20 Nation or a combination of the two (2)? 21 A: It would have to go back to the 22 Kettle and Stony Point First Nation. Back then there's 23 probably letters stating that it would go back -- it 24 would probably would have said differently. 25 Q: It probably?
2211 A: There's -- was -- there probably was 2 letters stating differently back then, but in my opinion 3 it would have to go back to the Kettle and Stony Point 4 First Nation. 5 Q: Okay. And in terms of who cleans up 6 the land, back in 1993, first of all, let me ask you: 7 Did you know at that point in time whether or not there 8 had to be any environmental assessment or clean up of the 9 base before it could be turned over? 10 A: I had a good idea it had to be 11 cleaned up, but at that time the only thing I had in mind 12 was to get the government to start talking. At that time 13 they didn't and like I said, I'm not a -- a person that 14 talks to the government and negotiates on different 15 things by myself, 'cause I'm not educated enough. 16 So -- and what I had in mind was just the 17 -- the Kettle and Stony Point council would deal with all 18 this stuff. That's more or less what I -- why I backed 19 out. 20 There was a lot of other different things 21 there also, but in my mind I wanted to achieve something 22 where the government would start talking and get things 23 moving and that way, I could get out of there. 24 Q: Okay. So back in March and April of 25 1993, where according to the document we looked at,
2221 Exhibit 163, you were the Chief of Stoney Point First 2 Nation and as chief, it looks like you and perhaps 3 others, had meetings with the Department of National 4 Defence in March of 1993. 5 I take it those meetings were simply 6 between you and others from the Stoney Point First Nation 7 and DND? I take it that Kettle and Stony Point Band was 8 not involved in those discussions? 9 A: We had these meetings, but with the 10 DND they were just the ones in charge and -- at the Camp 11 Ipperwash. 12 There may have been different people that 13 came there, but ... 14 Q: Okay. But -- 15 A: Maybe we went somewhere else, I don't 16 know. I can't remember 100 percent -- 17 Q: Okay. 18 A: Like -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: I know we met with -- with people, 21 yes, but... 22 Q: Okay. And when -- 23 A: As far as I know 24 Q: Okay, and when you met with people, 25 I'm just trying to get a bit of sense of the lay of the
2231 land. I take it back in March of 1993, and maybe if you 2 look at that letter, Exhibit 163, which is the Stoney 3 Point First Nation letter dated April 4th, 1993. It's at 4 Tab 3 of your binder. 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It's Tab 3, Mr. 6 Tolsma. 7 THE WITNESS: Oh, Tab 3. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MS. KAREN JONES: 10 Q: I'm sorry, I didn't say that clearly 11 enough for you. 12 A: Oh, okay. 13 Q: Tab 3 in your book. Okay. If you 14 have a look at that letter and see if it assists you in 15 recalling back in March and April of 1993, when you were 16 meeting with people with DND and writing to them, whether 17 you and others were doing so solely as Stoney Point First 18 Nation or whether this was a joint effort between Stoney 19 Point First Nation and the Kettle and Stony Point Band. 20 A: In this one (1) here, we're doing it 21 as Stoney Point First Nation. 22 Q: Okay. Okay. And you've told us, Mr. 23 Tolsma, that on May the 6th, you and others entered the 24 Base -- sorry, May 6th of 1993. Did I get that right? 25 A: For -- for what purpose?
2241 Q: Maybe to -- to go in and establish a 2 -- your own living base there. 3 A: No. 4 Q: No? 5 A: No. 6 Q: Okay. Okay. Sorry, I think I -- you 7 know what, Mr. Commissioner, I'm wondering if actually -- 8 it's quite close to 5:00. It seems like it's been a long 9 day. I'm wondering it makes some sense to start afresh 10 in the morning? 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think 12 you're absolutely right. 13 MS. KAREN JONES: Yeah. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think you 15 got a long day and I think we could use a break and start 16 again in the morning, so it's five (5) to 5:00. We 17 adjourn now until nine o'clock tomorrow morning. Thank 18 you, Ms. Jones, that was a good suggestion. 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 20 adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, February 22nd at 9:00 21 a.m. 22 23 --- Upon adjourning at 4:45 p.m. 24 25
2251 2 Certified Correct 3 4 5 6 ________________________ 7 Dustin Warnock 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25