1 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 June 8th, 2006 25


1 Appearances 2 Derry Millar ) Commission Counsel 3 Susan Vella ) 4 Donald Worme, Q. C ) (np) 5 Katherine Hensel ) (np) 6 Megan Ferrier ) 7 8 Murray Klippenstein ) (np) The Estate of Dudley 9 Vilko Zbogar ) (np) George and George 10 Andrew Orkin ) (np) Family Group 11 Basil Alexander ) 12 13 Peter Rosenthal ) Aazhoodena and George 14 Jackie Esmonde ) Family Group 15 Amanda Rogers ) (np) Student-at-law 16 17 Anthony Ross ) (np) Residents of 18 Cameron Neil ) (np) Aazhoodena (Army Camp) 19 Kevin Scullion ) (np) 20 21 William Henderson ) (np) Kettle Point & Stony 22 Jonathon George ) Point First Nation 23 Colleen Johnson ) (np) 24 25


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Kim Twohig ) (np) Government of Ontario 3 Walter Myrka ) (np) 4 Susan Freeborn ) (np) 5 6 Sheri Hebdon ) Student-at-law 7 8 Janet Clermont ) Municipality of 9 David Nash ) (np) Lambton Shores 10 Nora Simpson ) (np) Student-at-law 11 12 Peter Downard ) (np) The Honourable Michael 13 Bill Hourigan ) (np) Harris 14 Jennifer McAleer ) 15 16 Ian Smith ) (np) Robert Runciman 17 Alice Mrozek ) (np) 18 19 Harvey T. Strosberg, Q.C.) (np) Charles Harnick 20 Jacqueline Horvat ) (np) 21 22 23 24 25


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Douglas Sulman, Q.C. ) Marcel Beaubien 3 Mary Jane Moynahan) (np) 4 Dave Jacklin ) (np) 5 Trevor Hinnegan ) (np) 6 7 Mark Sandler ) Ontario Provincial 8 Andrea Tuck-Jackson ) Ontario Provincial Police 9 Leslie Kaufman ) (np) 10 11 Ian Roland ) (np) Ontario Provincial 12 Karen Jones ) Police Association & 13 Debra Newell ) (np) K. Deane 14 Ian McGilp ) (np) 15 Annie Leeks ) (np) 16 Jennifer Gleitman ) (np) 17 Robyn Trask ) (np) 18 Caroline Swerdlyk ) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Julian Falconer ) (np) Aboriginal Legal 3 Brian Eyolfson ) (np) Services of Toronto 4 Kimberly Murray ) (np) 5 Julian Roy ) 6 Clem Nabigon ) (np) 7 Linda Chen ) (np) 8 Chris Darnay ) (np) 9 Sunil Mathai ) (np) 10 Adriel Weaver ) (np) Student-at-Law 11 12 Al J.C. O'Marra ) (np) Office of the Chief 13 Robert Ash, Q.C. ) (np) Coroner 14 William Horton ) (np) Chiefs of Ontario 15 Matthew Horner ) (np) 16 Kathleen Lickers ) (np) 17 18 Mark Fredrick ) (np) Christopher Hodgson 19 Craig Mills ) (np) 20 Megan Mackey ) (np) 21 Peter Lauwers ) (np) 22 Erin Tully ) (np) 23 Michelle Fernando ) 24 Maanit Zemel ) (np) 25 Patrick Greco ) (np)


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 3 David Roebuck ) (np) Debbie Hutton 4 Anna Perschy ) (np) 5 Melissa Panjer ) 6 Adam Goodman ) (np) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 8 4 5 DONALD WILLIAM BELL, Resumed 6 Cross-Examination by Mr. Jonathan George 11 7 Cross-Examination by Mr. Julian Roy 20 8 Re-Direct Examination by Ms. Susan Vella 47 9 10 TREVOR EDWARD RICHARDSON, Sworn 11 Examination-In-Chief by Ms. Susan Vella 54 12 Examination-In-Chief by Ms. Karen Jones 253 13 Cross-Examination by Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson 262 14 Continued Examination-In-Chief by 15 Ms. Karen Jones 274 16 Cross-Examination by Ms. Jennifer McAleer 275 17 Cross-Examination by Ms. Melissa Panjer 279 18 Cross-Examination by Mr. Basil Alexander 285 19 Cross-Examination by Mr. Peter Rosenthal 315 20 21 Certificate of Transcript 364 22 23 24 25


1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-1670 Document Number 2005554. Curriculum 4 Vitae of Trevor Richardson. 56 5 P-1671 Document Number 1000858. Handwritten 6 Police notes of Trevor Richardson, August 30- 7 September 14, 1995. (Notebook dedicated 8 to Ipperwash) 62 9 P-1672 Document Number 2005608. Handwritten 10 notebook entries of Trevor Richardson, 11 September 07 to September 16, 1995. 83 12 P-1673 Coordinated Investigation Team (CIT) 13 Organizational Chart (Project Maple) 14 marked by Witness Mr. Trevor Richardson, 15 June 08, 2006. 133 16 P-1674 Transcript of Region 01, Chatham 17 Communications Centre, Trevor Richardson, 18 September 06, 1995, 20:59 hrs, Chatham 19 Communications Centre Logger tape number 20 146, Track 3, Disc 3 of 20 191 21 P-1675 Trevor Richardson Audio CD. 191 22 P-1676 Document Number 2005343. Court of Appeal 23 for Ontario between: Her Majesty the Queen 24 and Kenneth Deane, Affidavit of Trevor 25 Richardson, August 05, 1998. 224


1 List of Exhibits (cont'd) 2 Exhibit No. Description Page No. 3 P-1677 Handwritten notebook entries of Trevor 4 Richardson (Ipperwash related notebook), 5 August 28, 1996 - February 03, 1999. 226 6 P-1678 Document Number 5000128. Interview of 7 Trevor Richardson by Detective Armstrong, 8 March 11, 2003. 230 9 P-1679 Document Number 1000107. District 10 Telecommunications Operational Contingency 11 Plan, Shift identification numbers 12 (Undated). 233 13 P-1680 Document Number 5000129. Statement of 14 Trevor E. Richardson (undated). 235 15 P-1681 Reserved. 275 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 --- Upon commencing at 9:02 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 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 7 morning. Good morning, everyone. 8 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Good morning, 9 Commissioner. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 11 morning. 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We're just waiting for 13 the -- the Witness to come. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, in the 15 washroom? 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: He'll be right here. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 22 morning. Good morning. 23 MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: Good morning, Mr. 24 Commissioner. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good


1 morning, Mr. George. 2 3 DONALD WILLIAM BELL, Resumes 4 5 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: 6 Q: Good morning, Inspector Bell. 7 A: Good morning. 8 Q: I just have a few questions for you. 9 My name is Jonathan George and I represent the Chippewas 10 of Kettle and Stony Point and during this phase of the 11 Inquiry I appear for the Chiefs of Ontario as well. 12 Now, I know you've been asked several 13 questions already by both Ms. Vella and Ms. Esmonde on 14 this topic, but I'm going to be referring you solely to 15 your notes at Tab 6 page 41, these are the -- the journal 16 and notebook entries, and questions relating to your 17 receipt of information from Constable Dew at 21:15 hours 18 on September the 6th. 19 Now, perhaps others aren't but I'm still a 20 little confused, so let me get this straight, your 21 meeting with Constable Dew, it wasn't a phone 22 conversation, it was in person, correct? 23 A: I believe it was in person. I think 24 I alluded to yesterday, I don't have an independent 25 recollection of this meeting.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: If it wasn't for my notes I wouldn't 3 be recalling this. However, I -- because of the note I 4 believe it was in person because I usually would indicate 5 it was by phone. 6 Q: Okay. 7 A: So I believe it was a -- a slight 8 conversation in passing. 9 Q: But I take it given -- given the 10 testimony you have given you -- it has refreshed your 11 memory to some degree. You now do have some recollection 12 of it because of your notes, correct? 13 A: Because of my notes. 14 Q: Okay. And again I don't know if you 15 said this already but I -- I understood from your 16 testimony that it wasn't your sense he sought you out to 17 give you that information? 18 A: That was my sense, yes. 19 Q: Okay. And do you have any 20 recollection as to how long this conversation took place? 21 A: I believe it would be very brief. 22 Q: Okay. And I want to get this 23 straight also. Once the information was conveyed to you 24 was it -- did you make an assumption that the source of 25 the information was a confidential informant?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: Okay. He didn't tell you that 3 specifically? 4 A: Hmm. 5 Q: He didn't describe this source as a 6 confidential informant? 7 A: In my notes I refer to it as a 8 source, information unknown. 9 Q: Okay. But I take it he wouldn't have 10 told you that, that it was an unknown source? 11 A: He would have told me it's an unknown 12 source. If -- if he was referring to it he would have 13 said I -- something to the effect of I've source 14 information or I have CI information or something to that 15 effect. 16 Q: Okay. Okay. And I understand from 17 your testimony also that you didn't probe Constable Dew 18 further on the details of that source out of concerns 19 over the protection of confidentiality identity? 20 A: Out of the concerns of 21 confidentiality and in the fact that my knowledge of 22 Constable Dew was that of an experienced criminal 23 investigator. And as such I took the assumption that he 24 would have known how to analyse or put reliability 25 factors on source information.


1 Q: Okay. I just wanted to clear that 2 up because that was an assumption you made. He didn't 3 communicate that to you that I'm not going to give you 4 any further information because of that concern? 5 A: That's correct. And generally in the 6 police circles when people have sources you don't query 7 them as to the nature of that source. 8 Q: Sure. But, in terms -- but beyond 9 sort of discussing the source and information about the 10 source, that -- discussing the substance of the 11 information that would have no impact on that, would it 12 have? 13 A: Discussing the substance of the 14 information? 15 Q: Sure, the substance of the 16 information as opposed to details of the source? 17 A: No. 18 Q: Okay. But, you chose not to pursue 19 further the substance of the information? 20 A: I'm just going to ask you if you 21 could just raise that microphone just a touch please? 22 Q: Sure, I apologize. 23 A: Thank you. 24 Q: I guess the distinction I was trying 25 to draw was between the substance of the information --


1 what was relayed to him, as opposed to the source of the 2 information and details surrounding the source of the 3 information. But, you didn't probe him on either of 4 those things? 5 A: No I didn't probe him as to the -- 6 who the source was 7 Q: Right. 8 A: -- and I didn't probe him as to the 9 information that was obtained. 10 Q: Okay. Did you know or did you come 11 to any understanding as to whether that info was just 12 then recently received or did you make any assessment as 13 to the currency of the information? 14 A: I believe that it was recently 15 received. 16 Q: Okay. And was that an assumption you 17 made or did he communicate that to you, if you can 18 recall? 19 A: I can't recall. 20 Q: Again, if you can recall, and I 21 appreciate you're having difficulty doing so, did 22 Constable Dew tell you whether or not that info, the very 23 info he communicated to you was separately received by 24 another Officer? Were you then aware of that or are you 25 aware of that now?


1 A: Are you saying that the information 2 provided by Dew was provided by another party to him? 3 Q: No. We've heard evidence from a 4 Sheldon Poole, are you familiar -- are you -- do you know 5 Sheldon Poole? 6 A: I don't believe so. 7 Q: Constable Poole, okay. And Constable 8 Dew didn't speak to you about Constable Poole that 9 evening? 10 A: I don't believe so, no. 11 Q: Okay. And if he had mentioned to you 12 that the information he was communicating to you was also 13 received by a Sheldon Poole, if he told you that that 14 likely would have been something you recorded in your 15 notes, fair? 16 A: Correct. 17 Q: Because if information like that was 18 received by another Officer that would have been useful 19 information to you, would it have? 20 A: Just to clarify for my own benefit, 21 are you saying that Constable Poole received the same 22 information that Constable Dew received? 23 Q: Yes? 24 A: From the same source? 25 Q: That's the evidence we've heard.


1 A: So we have two (2) officers receiving 2 information from the same source, stating the same thing? 3 Q: Yes. 4 A: Yes? 5 Q: Similar. Okay. 6 A: That would have been -- 7 Q: You didn't know that? 8 A: No. 9 Q: And you would have liked to have 10 known that? 11 A: Well, again in the world that I 12 described yesterday as the perfect intelligence scenario 13 where everything is coming and pooling through me, yes I 14 would like to know that. Having regard for the filters 15 that were in place and the way information was being 16 disseminated at that time, as long as the information was 17 going to the central source then it was acceptable at 18 that time. 19 Q: Okay. Bottom line is you didn't know 20 that -- 21 A: Correct. 22 Q: -- so I'll end it there. Just one 23 (1) final thing, Inspector Bell, and I'll tie this to 24 Constable Poole and Constable Dew in a minute, but in 25 your experience as an Officer generally, as a Detective


1 and as an Intelligence Officer, I take it you personally 2 have had occasion to deal with confidential informants? 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: Okay. And in terms of receiving -- 5 recording information from such people, is it your 6 practice to record the information you received in your 7 notebook or do you maintain a separate notebook? 8 A: Generally maintain a separate 9 notebook. 10 Q: Okay. You wouldn't simply leave it 11 unrecorded? 12 A: CI information? 13 Q: Right? 14 A: Generally, no. 15 Q: Okay. Did you ever receive a 16 separate notebook from -- did you ever become aware of or 17 receive a separate notebook from Constable Dew? 18 A: No. 19 Q: Okay. So the only information you 20 had from then until now about this confidential 21 informant, the substance of the information was what was 22 communicated to you that night at 21:15 hours? 23 A: And I -- in preparation for the 24 Inquiry. 25 Q: Sure. And I take it you spoke


1 earlier about your assumption that someone like Dew and 2 had been experienced in -- criminal investigator that 3 they would know how to treat that information, how to 4 deal with a confidential informant, I take it you would 5 have expected that they would do something like that, 6 maintain a separate notebook to record that information? 7 A: Well, having regard for this 8 operation, I would expect that Constable Dew had a 9 separate notebook, more than likely, for Project Maple -- 10 Q: Okay. 11 A: -- and that would be acceptable to 12 include that CI information in that Project Maple 13 notebook. 14 Q: But that's the kind of stuff you were 15 referring to when you earlier said "I assume he would 16 know how to deal with that information"? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. Thank you very much, Inspector 19 Bell. Thank you, Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much, Mr. George. 22 Good morning, Mr. Roy. 23 MR. JULIAN ROY: Morning, Mr. 24 Commissioner. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 MR. JULIAN ROY: The mic is not staying 4 up, Mr. Commissioner. Not that it needs to extend that 5 high but -- not that high. That's Mr. Scullion's height. 6 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You can't 8 blame Mr. Scullion for this one. Okay. 9 10 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 11 Q: Good morning, Inspector Bell. 12 A: Good morning. 13 Q: I have a few questions that relate 14 more specifically to the intelligence cycle. And you've 15 been asked at length about it and I don't want to 16 duplicate what other counsel have already done. 17 But largely, I'm going to suggest to you 18 that the benefit that you've been talking about when 19 you've been describing the intelligence cycle is largely 20 the benefit of having the Incident Commander have 21 reliable and accurate information at the end of the day; 22 is that right? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: What I want to explore with you is 25 some other benefits that the intelligence cycle could


1 yield in an operation like this and I want to do it by 2 alerting you to some documents and some other evidence 3 that we've heard thus far in the Inquiry to get your view 4 on that, all right? 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: I want to start at the -- at the 7 collection phase of the intelligence cycle which is stage 8 2. And you've been very candid with us and told us that 9 in your view, looking back with hindsight, that the 10 collection phase could have been done better in this 11 operation, correct? 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: Okay. Now, you've told us that -- 14 that one of the things that you said two (2) days ago was 15 that you don't need to be a formal intelligence officer 16 to be involved in the collection phase; is that correct? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: And, in fact, it's a part of every 19 police officer's job to walk the beat in ordinary 20 circumstances and learn what's going on in the community, 21 right? 22 A: Gather information. 23 Q: Yeah. Now, what I'm going to suggest 24 to you though is if you're going to be using, in an 25 operation like this, people without an intelligence


1 background or intelligence training it's important to 2 give them some direction with respect to how -- what 3 they're to do with the information that they gather, 4 correct? 5 A: I'd agree with that. 6 Q: Okay. In other words, how they fit 7 within the intelligence cycle; they have to have some 8 general idea how they fit in, correct? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: Now, after the information is 11 collected you've told us about how it's processed through 12 the intelligence cycle and the ultimate end user for the 13 information is the Incident Commander, correct? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: And then the Incident Commander 16 decides what are his tactical priorities, based on the 17 information, right? 18 A: Correct. 19 Q: And then he briefs his people 20 underneath him with respect to how they're conduct -- how 21 they're to conduct themselves based on the information, 22 correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: Now, you've told us that -- that with 25 respect to confidential informants and information that


1 you collect from confidential informants, you'd agree 2 with me that that type of information should be 3 approached with some degree of caution, correct? 4 A: Correct. 5 Q: And that's whether or not we're in an 6 investigation type environment or an intelligence type 7 environment, correct? 8 A: Sorry? 9 Q: All right. We are fellow allergy 10 sufferers -- 11 A: Exactly. 12 Q: -- and we'll both have to shout at 13 one another to make ourselves heard. What I'm suggesting 14 to you is that information from confidential informants 15 has to be approached with some degree of caution whether 16 we're talking about it in an intelligence context or an 17 investigation context, right? 18 A: Yes, you have to ensure that the 19 information is properly analysed. 20 Q: Okay. And you had an expectation 21 with respect to Mark Dew that he was going to be doing 22 some of that analysis himself before he passed on the 23 information, right? 24 A: Correct. 25 Q: Wherever that information gets


1 analysed it has to get analysed by some -- somebody; is 2 that correct? 3 A: Somebody has to make an assessment. 4 Q: Okay. Now, you would agree with me 5 that an officer who's been tasked to handle the 6 collection phase of the intelligence cycle, he's not 7 authorized to bypass the Incident Commander and 8 distribute that information to other officers within the 9 operation; is that correct? 10 A: I don't know if 'authorized' is the 11 proper word or not. Certainly in the police community, 12 information that's received is sometimes dispersed 13 without going up the chain accordingly. We saw an 14 example of that information being shared by Peter Warren 15 out of Orillia without going to his commander earlier in 16 my evidence. So on occasion information is dispersed 17 without going directly to the Incident Commander. 18 Q: All right. And because there's that 19 risk, what has to happen is officers who are involved in 20 this collection, they have to be given very clear 21 direction as to what they're to do with information when 22 they gather it, correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: And that would ensure that that type 25 of problem that you've talked about is less likely to


1 happen, correct? 2 A: Correct. 3 Q: All right. 4 A: Although, I think we have to also be 5 clear that officers gathering information aren't always 6 aware that they're gathering information that's going to 7 be filtered through an intelligence process. 8 On occasion they're just out there doing 9 their day-to-day duties and are providing information 10 just simply as such and they're not expecting it to go 11 through any formal process. 12 Q: Sure. But Mark Dew, in terms of how 13 I understand his role, he was under Detective Richardson, 14 correct? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And Detective Richardson was 17 supervising or was, prior to the incident, the conduit 18 for intelligence information to flow to Mark Wright and 19 John Carson, correct? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: So you would have an expectation that 22 -- that Mark Dew was explicitly going to be involved in 23 this intelligent -- for lack of a better word 24 intelligence collection, correct? 25 A: Yes, I'd agree with that.


1 Q: All right. Now, if you could turn up 2 -- I've provided to the Registrar earlier today a couple 3 of exhibits, the first one is P-1137. 4 Do you have those Mr. Commissioner? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I do. 6 MR. JULIAN ROY: All right. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 9 Q: Now, we've heard evidence with 10 respect to -- to this document already. It's a 11 conversation at 8:34 -- I believe it's 8:34 proper and 12 not 8:34 plus seven (7), Mr. Commissioner; that's my 13 recollection of the evidence. 14 But it's 8:34 p.m. It's Mark Dew calling 15 in with respect to the information, the confidential 16 informant information that you've already been asked in 17 some detail about. 18 Have you had a chance to look at this 19 document? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: All right. And I want to -- I don't 22 want to read to you the whole document or ask you about 23 every line of the document, but there's a couple of parts 24 that I want to direct you to. 25 And the first part is the very first four


1 (4) lines or five (5) statements. 2 "DEW: Hi, how are you doing? It's 3 Mark Dew calling again. 4 PETERMAN: Yes? 5 DEW: I have some more information for 6 the folks there." 7 Do you see that? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And then Peterman says: 10 "Okay. Who did you want to talk to?" 11 And Dew says: 12 "Well, ah, if -- if the ERT radio guy 13 is standing by, if there's an ERT 14 sergeant there." 15 I want to stop you there for a second. Is 16 the ERT sergeant the right person for Mark Dew to be 17 passing this information to? 18 A: Again that's difficult for me to 19 comment on. On the face of it, no, it wouldn't be. 20 However, I'm not aware of conversations prior to 20:34, 21 so I'm not aware if this information has been shared with 22 Detective Sergeant Richardson or if it's been shared with 23 the Incident Commander. So I could be coming in in the 24 middle of the story here. 25 Q: All right. Assuming this is the


1 first -- the first con -- the first call in to Command by 2 Mark Dew with respect to this information it would be the 3 wrong person, correct? 4 A: In my opinion. 5 Q: All right. Now, if you could -- if 6 you look over the next -- the rest of that page and the - 7 - and the page after that what you see is, Mark Dew is 8 imparting the information with respect to firearms. 9 Do you see that? 10 A: Yes, I do. 11 Q: And I'm not going to take you through 12 that. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: I you go to the end of -- of the -- 17 the document there's another exchange which is important 18 with respect to this area; that's on page 4. 19 A: Page 4? 20 Q: Yeah, at the very bottom. 21 A: Okay. 22 Q: Mark Dew says: 23 "Now, where do you go with this from -- 24 for the guys out here? Do you handle 25 that from there?"


1 Do you see that? 2 A: Okay, I'm just going to -- 3 Q: Yeah, if you read the rest of the 4 page that's -- that would be useful. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: Okay. 9 Q: All right. And if you look at the 10 end of page 4 and onto the following page it's at the end 11 of the conversation and Mark Dew says: 12 "Now, where do I got with this..." 13 And he's referring to the information that 14 he's just imparted: 15 "...from -- for the guys out here? Do 16 you handle that from there?" 17 Do you see that? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And then Graham answers: 20 "I'll let, ah -- Stan know and he can - 21 - he can let them know what's going 22 on." 23 Dew responds: 24 "Superduper." 25 Graham:


1 "All right. Thank you, Mark. Bye." 2 See that? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Now, we've heard evidence that the 5 Stan that's referred to is Stan Korosec who is the ERT 6 Team Leader? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Is Stan Korosec the next person that 9 should be learning about this information? 10 A: What I think is happening here -- 11 Q: Yes? 12 A: -- I believe Mark is asking, when he 13 says: 14 "Where do I go from -- where do I go 15 with this from -- for the guys out 16 here?" 17 I think he's talking about the ERT guys 18 out there. 19 Q: Yes? 20 A: So I think he's looking for direction 21 as to whether or not Graham is going to pass that 22 information on to the ERT officers or if Stan is going to 23 pass it on to the ERT Officers, or if in fact, they 24 wanted Mark to pass it on to the ERT officers. 25 Q: But, should that be happening from


1 Mark Dew to the ERT team command and then directly to the 2 officers or should that go through the Incident 3 Commander? 4 A: Well, certainly, you know, based on 5 this scenario here they've already breached the Incident 6 Commander. But, having said that, I don't know as I said 7 before, if that information has been relaid up through 8 the incident command through Trevor or directly to the 9 Incident Commander. 10 Q: All right. 11 A: So it's difficult for me to comment 12 on that. 13 Q: That's fine. Whose job is it to 14 decide whether information like this is -- is to be 15 considered a tactical priority? 16 A: Who establishes tactical priorities? 17 Q: Yeah? 18 A: The Incident Commander. 19 Q: All right. And he does that by 20 using this information and deciding how important it is 21 and how it fits in, correct? 22 A: Uses that as a piece of the puzzle to 23 determine the priorities. 24 Q: And other people lower down the chain 25 of command are not supposed to be making inde --


1 independent determinations as to whether or not, the 2 information -- how that impacts on tactical priorities, 3 correct? 4 A: Well, certainly I believe most 5 Incident Commanders consult with their team leaders in 6 making their decisions and their priorities. 7 Q: Yes, but that process doesn't go on 8 independent of the Incident Commander, correct? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: Now, you've told us that you have 11 some concerns with respect to the information that Mark 12 Dew received from the confidential informant and its 13 reliability; you've told us about that. 14 But, you've testified that you would have 15 passed that information onto the Incident Commander in 16 any event, correct? 17 A: Correct. 18 Q: Given its nature, right? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: But, you've told us that you would 21 apply some sort of caveats or qualifications to the 22 information as you were communicating it. 23 Do you recall that evidence? 24 A: Correct, yes. 25 Q: Do you see any of those caveats and


1 qualifications on this information as you read this 2 exchange between Mark Dew and Graham? 3 A: With regards to the weapons? 4 Q: Yes? 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: No. 9 Q: I want to take you to another 10 transcript and that's P-1351. It's Inquiry Document 11 1001992. And I should -- with respect to the previous 12 document that's Inquiry Document 100013. 13 But, with respect to P-1351, we've heard 14 evidence -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, I 16 have to interrupt you Mr. Roy -- 17 MR. JULIAN ROY: Yes? 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- what was 19 the Inquiry Document number? 20 MR. JULIAN ROY: On 1351? 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 22 MR. JULIAN ROY: It's 1001992. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. I'm 24 sorry. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN ROY: 2 Q: We've heard evidence that this is a 3 conversation between the TRU leader, Kent Skinner, and 4 one of his subordinates which -- who was misspelled 5 there, it says Trepanzic, it's actually Zupancic. 6 A: Okay. 7 Q: All right. And, have you had a 8 chance to review this document? 9 A: I read it this morning. 10 Q: All right. Now, could you tell me, 11 and you would agree with me that this -- it's the same -- 12 and we've heard evidence about this. This is the same 13 information that originates from Mark Dew's report -- 14 A: It appears to be. 15 Q: -- and it's being -- now being 16 transmitted to the TRU Team members on the ground. The 17 people that are actually going to be involved with the 18 occupiers. 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: Do you see any of the qualifications 21 that you -- that you have in mind in terms of how you 22 would have communicated this type of information? 23 Do you see any of those qualifications or 24 caveats in the way that this information is reported? 25 A: No, I didn't.


1 Q: Now, you've told us that John Carson, 2 in terms of -- you said that you wouldn't be concerned if 3 -- if Mark Dew's information got to the Incident 4 Commander because you felt that John Carson didn't view 5 the firearms issue as a tactical priority, correct? 6 A: Sorry, what I believe I indicated was 7 that if the information from Mark Dew went to Inspector 8 Carson in the -- in the form that's been presented here 9 today -- 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: -- that Inspector Carson would put a 12 limited weight onto that because Inspector Carson had 13 indicated earlier that he was not going to use 14 intelligence information to make tactical -- to base his 15 decisions on tactical operations. 16 Q: All right. So in terms of how the 17 operation would unfold you were satisfied that John 18 Carson wouldn't be unduly influenced or influenced in any 19 way by this type of information, correct? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: All right. Now, it would be 22 important that the Incident Commander and the rest of his 23 command team are on the same page with respect to 24 intelligence information and what the tactical priorities 25 are, correct?


1 A: Correct. 2 Q: For example, it would be a very bad 3 thing if TRU Team leader -- 4 A: Sorry? 5 Q: I'm sorry, do you want me to repeat 6 that? 7 A: Yes, please. 8 Q: It would be a very bad thing if the 9 TRU Team leader was operating under a different set of 10 facts and had different tactical priorities than the 11 Incident Commander, right? 12 A: Yes, everyone should be on the same 13 page. 14 Q: We -- the TRU Leader, Kent Skinner, 15 testified in this proceeding that he, based on this 16 information, believed it was likely that the people in 17 the park on the evening of September 6th, 1995 had the 18 firearms that are described in this report; did you know 19 that? 20 A: I don't -- with regards to Kent 21 Skinner, I'm not familiar with what he said at the 22 Inquiry and I'm not really familiar with his thought 23 process or what he had available to him that night other 24 than based on the -- that document you provided me. 25 Q: Assuming that Kent Skinner was


1 operating under the belief that it's likely that these 2 weapons were present on the evening of September 6th, 3 1995 that would be a bad thing when one keeps in mind 4 John Carson's tactical priorities as you understood them, 5 correct? 6 A: I believe that John Carson's tactical 7 priority in establishing weaponry in the park was that 8 the occupiers had weapons available to them so although 9 Kent Skinner had, based on that, had the assumption that 10 there was more sophisticated weaponry that the Incident 11 Commander and him were at least on the same page that 12 there was weapons available. 13 Q: All right. Now, you've told us that 14 -- or you conceded that there was no formal traditional 15 intelligence process that was in place prior to September 16 6th, 1995 and I don't want to go over that ground. 17 But you've told us that -- that -- or you 18 suggested to us that that failing is less of a concern 19 because John Carson, given his personal skills and 20 abilities and knowledge, was in a good position to 21 perform analysis on the information that he was 22 receiving, correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: But I'm going to suggest to you that 25 John Carson's knowledge and skills and abilities have


1 nothing to do with this problem that we've talked about, 2 in terms of intelligence information being circulated 3 lower down the chain of command and potentially different 4 actors having different information, correct? 5 A: It would appear as though information 6 was dec -- was disseminated that shouldn't have been. 7 Q: All right. But my point to you, I'm 8 going to suggest to you, is that John Carson's skills or 9 the skill -- personal skills of an Incident Commander 10 cannot address this issue about how information, 11 intelligence information, gets disseminated lower down in 12 the chain of command, correct? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: So in the future ,in terms of 15 structuring operations such as this, the fact that the 16 Incident Commander has a high level of skill and 17 knowledge shouldn't be a substitute for a properly 18 structured intelligence cycle and a proper -- properly 19 structured intelligence process, correct? 20 A: Correct. And in -- even in this 21 situation with the, you know, flaws that we've identified 22 the information should have come through the identified 23 chain to Inspector Carson without being disseminated 24 sideways. 25 Q: Thank you. Now, leaving aside the --


1 the formal traditional intelligence structure, leaving 2 that aside which we -- we know wasn't in place prior to 3 September 6th, 1995, do you recall in terms of the 4 planning meetings or discussions at Incident Command, do 5 you recall any directions being given to the command team 6 and subordinate officers with respect to how information 7 was to flow and that it was not to flow sideways as 8 you've described it? 9 A: Dating back to as early as 1993 there 10 was information provided by Incident Commander John 11 Carson as to the flow of information. If you recall back 12 to my evidence back in '93 they wanted to come up through 13 Forest Detachment through Beacock, myself and then 14 Inspector Carson. 15 So I think it was clear to the team 16 leaders or the management team under Inspector Carson as 17 to the flow of information. 18 Q: All right. So John Carson, to your 19 knowledge, would have been aware of this issue, correct, 20 given that incident in 1993, right? 21 A: Excuse me, where... 22 Q: The issue about proper flow of 23 information -- 24 A: Certainly -- 25 Q: -- vertically through the chain of


1 command. John Carson in your mind appreciated that 2 issue, yes? 3 A: I believe John Carson expected that - 4 - that flow of information. That was demonstrated 5 through the Peter Warren incident where information 6 flowed -- was given directly to the officers on the 7 ground without going through the proper chain. 8 Q: All right. But do you recall John 9 Carson doing anything in September -- in August and 10 September 1995 that would have alerted somebody at, for 11 example, Mark Dew's level or Graham's level or Stan 12 Korosec's level to this issue? 13 A: The officers that fall under the -- 14 John Carson instructs the team leaders. Instead of 15 incumbent upon the team leaders to ensure the people that 16 fall under them are aware of the processing of 17 information and the flow of the chain of command, I think 18 it's important to realize that this -- the OPP is still a 19 paramilitary organization that has a proper flow and 20 chain of command and that it's common knowledge within, 21 or it should be common knowledge, that constables report 22 to sergeants, sergeants to staff sergeants and the like. 23 So some of this has to be taken on as 24 basic training for police officers. 25 Q: All right. Now, the -- you've


1 referred to the incident in 1993 with respect to John 2 Carson having concerns about how information was flowing 3 from a joint forces organization? 4 A: Joint Forces -- 5 Q: Forces operation, sorry. 6 A: Joint forces operation. 7 Q: To the Forest Detachment. You've 8 already given evidence about that. 9 And what's reflected in your notes is -- 10 is John Carson is saying or he -- John Carson, you 11 reflect in your notes that he felt Intelligence Branch 12 role was to gather information, not to tell them how to 13 handle the incident? And I -- 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: -- you recall that entry in the notes 16 that Ms. Vella took you to? 17 A: Yes, I do. 18 Q: From your perspective, in terms of 19 how that incident in 1993 unfolded were you trying to 20 tell the Incident Commander how to conduct his incident? 21 A: No, and again if you read further -- 22 Q: Yeah. 23 A: -- that had nothing to do with the 24 JFO. And later on Inspector Carson indicates that he was 25 very pleased with the cooperation and the efforts of the


1 JFO. His concerns stem from a conversation that resulted 2 out of General Headquarters that he didn't feel was 3 appropriate and as such he contacted Chief Coles to make 4 a call I believe to Inspector Lawrensen to rectify that 5 as well, as I made a call to Peter Lollar at 6 Headquarters. So the concern was information 7 disseminating out of Headquarters without being put 8 through the flow in the local area. 9 Q: But John Carson is characterizing 10 that issue as the Intelligence Branch trying to tell him 11 how to handle the incident, right, according to your 12 notes? 13 A: With all due respect without trying 14 to get into Inspector Carson's mind, I think he was a 15 little ticked at the time and I think that may be taken 16 out of context. 17 Q: All right. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, you told Mr. Scullion about your 22 alarm concerning the various reports about firearms that 23 you received and were processing in the weeks previously 24 right up to the incident; is that correct? 25 A: That's correct.


1 Q: And you wouldn't consider yourself 2 part of the Command team, in terms of how the event -- 3 the operation was structured; is that correct? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: Now, if you were -- I'm going to ask 6 you a hypothetical, if you were part of the Command Team, 7 given your alarm about these reports about firearms in 8 the hands of the occupiers, would you have had any 9 hesitation about communicating that alarm to the Incident 10 Commander and to the rest of the command team? 11 A: Well, I think the command team was 12 very aware of the possibility for all -- a variety of 13 firearms or weaponry in the occupied area. 14 However, I believe that the Incident 15 Commander was basing his decisions that there would be an 16 availability of firearms/weapons and that that 17 availability was more than likely at the lower level of 18 sophistication. 19 Q: All right. But, what I'm asking you 20 is given -- if you were, as an Intelligence Officer, part 21 of the Command team and you had a direct pipeline to John 22 Carson and other members of the command team, I take it 23 you wouldn't have had any hesitation about communicating 24 the alarm that you felt about the presence of firearms, 25 and firearms of the nature that are being described in


1 Mark Dew's reports and other reports you're getting, 2 correct? 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: And you wouldn't have had any 5 hesitation in communicating that information or your 6 alarm rather, to other members of the command team 7 including perhaps the CMU team leader and the TRU team 8 leader, correct? 9 A: Information that I would provide 10 would be provided with the appropriate reliable -- 11 reliability factors. 12 Q: And the people you would be providing 13 that information to might include the TRU team leader and 14 also the CMU team leader, right? 15 A: That's correct. 16 Q: And that would ensure that those -- 17 the leaders of those two (2) teams would be operating on 18 the same information that everybody else was, right? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: I want to ask you about the Dyke and 21 Whitehead utterances. I know that's an awkward subject 22 to broach, but I do have a couple of more questions 23 beyond what Ms. Esmonde asked you about yesterday. 24 Now, you would agree that the statements 25 that are reflected in that transcript which you've


1 already seen are completely inconsistent with the roles 2 that they had as Intelligence officers, yes? 3 A: I'd agree. 4 Q: And as a fellow officer, an OPP 5 Officer you find it embarrassing to hear fellow officers 6 speaking in that fashion, correct? 7 A: Yes I do. 8 Q: And in your mind it has the potential 9 to bring discredit to, not only these two (2) officers, 10 but other officers within the OPP, correct? 11 A: Unfortunately it discredits 12 everybody. 13 Q: Yes. Now, in terms of how you would 14 approach these remarks, you wouldn't view the hostile and 15 uneasy atmosphere during the events of September 1995 as 16 any kind of excuse or mitigation for these remarks as 17 reflected in that transcript, correct? 18 A: I believe that it would play a 19 factor, however, it is no excuse. 20 Q: And in terms of assessing that 21 behaviour and those attitudes reflected in those 22 statements, you wouldn't consider the hostile and uneasy 23 atmosphere at the time to be an important factor in 24 mitigating, correct? 25 A: Those comments are inappropriate at


1 any time. 2 MR. JULIAN ROY: I believe those are my 3 questions, Mr. Commissioner. If I could just -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 5 very much. 6 MR. JULIAN ROY: -- look at my notes for 7 five (5) seconds? 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 MR. JULIAN ROY: Yes, those are my 12 questions. Thank you very much. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 14 Mr. Roy. Thank you, very much. 15 MR. JULIAN ROY: Thank you very much, 16 Inspector Bell. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 18 Sandler...? 19 MR. MARK SANDLER: Uncharacteristically, 20 I have no questions in re-examination. Thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 22 very much, Mr. Sandler. We're moving right along. 23 Yes, Ms. Vella, do you have any re- 24 examination? 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, I have one (1)


1 brief area of re-examination arising from the cross- 2 examination of Ms. Esmonde. 3 4 RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 5 Q: If contrasting reports of the same 6 occurrence are received would that give rise to you to a 7 reliability concern about which one is right? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Even if it came from two (2) separate 10 police officers? 11 A: Any time you have contrasting reports 12 there's an issue. And then again you have to go through 13 the evaluation stage in attempting to determine which 14 source is accurate and what weight or reliability factor 15 you put to it. 16 Q: And you would want, at minimum, to 17 alert the Incident Commander to the fact that there are 18 two (2) contrasting reports so that he would be aware of 19 that situation? 20 A: Certainly the Incident Commander 21 would be notified. However, you know, depending on how 22 significant the information is, if it's very significant 23 you'd want to expedite the flow, if it's not significant 24 you would take the necessary steps to substantiate it 25 before taking it up.


1 Q: All right. But you wouldn't likely 2 pass along one (1) version and not the other? 3 A: You have to present the true story so 4 they can make appropriate decisions. 5 Q: And if you had contrasting reports, 6 one (1) from a police officer who had heard it 7 secondhand, and the other being the statement of the 8 complainant retained -- obtained by another officer; 9 would you tend to favour one (1) over the other? 10 A: The officer receiving it firsthand 11 would be the benefit -- would be the priority for myself. 12 Q: Now, Ms. Esmonde put to you the 13 version of the Gerald George information concerning the 14 damage to a civilian car by bats that was based -- that 15 was presented by Mark Wright yesterday. 16 And just in fairness I'd like to put to 17 you -- or read to you the statement of Gerald George that 18 was taken by Constable Sheldon Poole who was the officer 19 at the checkpoint who took the statement from Mr. George. 20 And I've got a copy if we could hand it 21 up. It's Exhibit P-123, just so that you can follow 22 along as well. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 Q: Now, this is -- has been identified 2 as the interview report or statement taken by Constable 3 Sheldon Poole from Gerald George at 19:56 p.m. on the 4 evening of September 6th, the interview concluded at 5 20:27 p.m. And it is as follows: 6 "Q: What, if anything, can you tell 7 me about what just happened? 8 A: At about 7:51 p.m. on 6 September, 9 '95 I went onto Army Camp Road from 10 Ipperwash. Are coming off the reserve 11 at the Ipperwash Provincial Park when 12 Stewart George, nickname Worm, 13 mentioned for me -- motioned for me to 14 stop and I pulled onto the dirt. 15 Stewart apprec -- sorry, approached the 16 car and he was angry over an article 17 that I had put in the Force 18 Standard..." 19 It should be "Forrest". It says "Force 20 Standard". 21 "Stewart said that he quote, 'was going 22 to kick my ass', close quote. He was 23 angry and drunk so I proceeded to pull 24 away and Stewart threw a rock at my 25 sister's car and the rock impacted in


1 the back left quarter panel [bracket] 2 (directly behind the driver's door) and 3 I just drove away." 4 Going to the second page: 5 "Q: How do you know Stewart George? 6 A: I worked with him for about the 7 last three (3) months building the new 8 school at Kettle Point. 9 Q: Do you know how old he is? 10 A: Thirty-five (35) to forty (40), I 11 guess. 12 Q: How do you know that he, Stewart 13 George, was drunk? 14 A: I smelled him. It was strong with 15 beer smell and his speech was slurred. 16 Q: Did Stewart have anything in his 17 hands while he was talking to you? 18 A: He just had his fists resting on 19 my door. 20 Q: Who else was standing with 21 Stewart? 22 A: He came up away a way -- [sorry] 23 he came away from the other group. He 24 was about 35 feet away from the -- 25 Q: Did you recognize who was in the


1 other group? 2 A: No, I wasn't really looking at 3 them. One (1) of the young guys had a 4 bat though. 5 Q: How far away was Stewart when he 6 threw the rock at the car? 7 A: About 12 feet. 8 Q: Did you see Stewart pick the rock 9 up? 10 A: No, but as I was pulling away I 11 saw him wind up and throw the rock 12 which hit the car. 13 Q: Who owns the vehicle? 14 A: My sister." 15 Then there's personal information. 16 "Q: Do you wish to say anything else? 17 A: No." 18 Now, is it fair to say that this statement 19 suggests that the damage in question was caused by a rock 20 thrown by a occupier but not by bats by occupiers? 21 A: Correct. 22 Q: And further is it fair to say that 23 the statement provides an important context to the 24 events, in other words a personal dispute between Stewart 25 George and Gerald George?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And that the -- and also provides a 3 context for the general nature of that dispute being an 4 article in a particular paper? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: And furthermore that that might 7 indicate an ulterior motive for this informant in 8 relaying his information? 9 A: It's a possibility. 10 Q: And certainly one that a prudent 11 officer would want to pursue, based on this statement? 12 A: It should be a consideration in the 13 evaluation process. 14 Q: In other words this statement, would 15 at minimum, raise flags for you with respect to the 16 reliability of -- or at least what the true version of -- 17 of events were? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Those are my questions. And I want 20 to thank you very much for coming and sharing your 21 evidence with the Inquiry. 22 A: Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 24 very much for giving us your evidence. Thank you very 25 kindly.


1 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 3 4 (WITNESS STANDS DOWN) 5 6 MS. SUSAN VELLA: The next -- we're 7 prepared to proceed with the -- the next witness or we 8 can take a brief recess, whatever you want. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you don't 10 need a recess we can just go right into it. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: All right. We need to 12 hand out the books. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you need 14 a recess we'll take a brief recess. It's up to you, Ms. 15 Vella. 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Why don't we proceed. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We're just waiting for 21 the Witness; he's enroute. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I believe the


1 Commission is ready to call its next witness. We call 2 Detect -- retired Detective Sergeant Trevor Richardson. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 7 morning, sir. 8 MR. TREVOR RICHARDSON: Good morning, 9 sir. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 11 morning. 12 13 TREVOR EDWARD RICHARDSON, Sworn 14 15 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 16 Q: Good morning. 17 A: Morning. 18 Q: You'll have before you a book of 19 documents which I'll refer to as the Commission Counsel 20 brief. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: I understand that you became a Member 23 of the Ontario Provincial Police in 1973? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And with the exception of the period


1 from 1998 to 2000, you were stationed in the Chatham 2 area? 3 A: Yes I was. 4 Q: From 1973 to 1989, you were the 5 Liaison Officer for the -- sorry, for the -- first police 6 officer who joined the Moraviantown police force? 7 A: That was from '85 to '89. 8 Q: '85 to '89. Thank you. 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: I understand that in 1985 you 11 attended the Native Policing Seminar? 12 A: Yes I did. 13 Q: In September 1995 you were a 14 Detective Sergeant stationed at the Kent County Crime 15 Unit? 16 A: Yes I was. 17 Q: From 1998 to 2000, you were stationed 18 in London as Detective Sergeant in charge of intelligence 19 for the west region? 20 A: Yes I was. 21 Q: And if you would kindly go to Tab 1 22 of Commission Counsel brief; it's Inquiry Document 23 2005554. This appears to be your curriculum vitae. 24 Is that a fair and accurate rendition of your -- of your 25 qualifications and career as a police officer?


1 A: Yes it is. 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'd like to make that 3 the next Exhibit, please? 4 THE REGISTRAR: P-1670 Your Honour. 5 6 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1670: Document Number 2005554. 7 Curriculum Vitae of Trevor 8 Richardson. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 11 Q: I wonder, just based on your 12 experience, if you can tell us what the essential 13 difference in function is between a criminal investigator 14 and an intelligence officer? 15 A: A criminal investigator, when he gets 16 complaint of an alleged crime, will go out and do 17 personal interviews with the victim, any witnesses to the 18 crime, potential witnesses to the crime, and trying to 19 gather up all the facts to prove or disprove that the 20 crime occurred. 21 Intelligence Officer on the other hand 22 would be gathering information, rating it as to its 23 validity. And it may be that a crime has occurred or it 24 may not be, but it may be just that somebody has some 25 weapons, somebody has this, somebody has that. No


1 criminal offence at all. 2 But it might, further on down the road, it 3 might be important to know that these people had this in 4 their possession or that in their possession or -- 5 they've done something or they're a member of a group or 6 a gang or whatever. 7 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And do you agree 8 that both positions represent specialized fields within 9 policing? 10 A: Yes, they do. 11 Q: Did you consider yourself an expert - 12 - policing expert or a police expert in intelligence in 13 1995? 14 A: No, I did not. 15 Q: Prior to September of 1995 how much 16 intelligence training had you had? 17 A: None. 18 Q: Had you acted as an Intelligence 19 Officer prior to September '95? 20 A: No, I had not. 21 Q: Had you worked in the intelligence 22 field prior to September of '95? 23 A: As an Intelligence Officer, no I had 24 not. 25 Q: And when you say -- is that a


1 qualification? 2 A: Yes, I had worked with intelligence 3 units throughout the Province, doing surveillance or 4 whatever, but actually doing intelligence gathering as a 5 -- as my main function, no I was not. 6 Q: All right. So you had worked in 7 conjunction with Intelligence Officers in relation to 8 policing matters? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: Thank you. I understand that you 11 are a retired Officer? 12 A: Yes, I am. 13 Q: When did you retire? 14 A: Last year, end of March. 15 Q: I take it as a police officer you 16 were obliged to take and maintain notes relative to your 17 policing activities? 18 A: Yes, I was. 19 Q: Did you keep more than one (1) type 20 of written record? 21 A: Yes, I did. 22 Q: Can you describe what types of 23 written records you took? 24 A: Yes. The little notebooks that they 25 gave us back in 1973 and I used right up until my last


1 day. When I was in general law enforcement, traffic 2 tickets, accidents stuff like that, we kept -- I kept 3 that as my main source of notes. 4 When I got into the criminal field we took 5 -- we were using little three (3) ring binder notebooks 6 with paper in them because you'd have so many cases on 7 the go at once that if you ever got to court you'd have, 8 you know, seven (7) or eight (8) little wee books with 9 paper clips and stuff trying to go through for the dates 10 that you were working on that crime. 11 So these books here became very handy in 12 that you could record every day that you worked on this 13 specific crime as opposed to trying to find them in your 14 little notebooks. 15 Q: All right. So you had -- you had 16 black binders which were devoted to specific policing 17 operations and then you had your general police notebooks 18 which recorded in a general way your policing duties? 19 A: Yes. The little books would have 20 time on-duty, off-duty, vehicle mileage, any meals; stuff 21 like that. 22 Q: All right. Fair enough. And did you 23 keep a project specific notebook with respect to the 24 Ipperwash policing operation? 25 A: Yes, I did.


1 Q: And when did you create your entries 2 in that book relative to the events reflected? 3 A: Immediately. 4 Q: Immediately thereafter? 5 A: At the time or immediately right 6 after, so. 7 Q: All right. And what was your purpose 8 in creating these types of notes; the project specific 9 notes? 10 A: To refresh my memory and to know 11 what's going on and if something happened now, it might 12 have happened five (5) or six (6) days ago, so you'd have 13 a written down -- and jog your memory about what's 14 happening and what's going on. 15 Q: Now, prior to 1995 did you have any 16 involvement in any Ipperwash-related policing operations? 17 A: I would say no, except for one (1) 18 incident where I had to meet with an officer who was 19 leaving Forrest Detachment over the helicopter incident, 20 and he wanted to pass on an informant for me. And -- but 21 it didn't work out so I was like on it for about a day or 22 so; a day and a half. It wasn't that long. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: Other than that I had no other 25 Ipperwash involvement.


1 Q: Thank you. And if you would go, 2 kindly, to Tab 2 of the brief. This is Inquiry Document 3 Number 2005611. This is -- appears to be an excerpt -- 4 now, is this from your general notebook or is this from 5 the Ipperwash specific? 6 A: No, this is just from my general 7 notebook, yes. 8 Q: All right. And does this reflect 9 your -- your activities that you've just described? 10 Perhaps, you can show us. 11 A: No. 12 Q: No? 13 A: This -- this here, September 1st, 14 '93, September 2nd, was -- had nothing to do with 15 Ipperwash. It was a complaint about a Kettle Point 16 officer. 17 Q: All right. Yes, I can see that. 18 That's what I thought. We don't seem to have the -- your 19 notebook entry with respect to the August '93 20 interaction; would you happen to have that? 21 A: No, I don't. 22 Q: All right. Now, I understand that 23 your first involvement with the Ipperwash operation, 24 other than that brief involvement you had in '93 was on 25 August 30th, 1995?


1 A: That's correct. 2 Q: And if you would go to Tab 3, this is 3 Inquiry Document Number 1000858. 4 And, first of all, can you identify these 5 notes for us? They appear to go from August 30th to 6 September 14, 1995. 7 A: Yes, they do. 8 Q: And are those your notes with respect 9 to the Ipperwash operation? 10 A: A copy of them, yes. 11 Q: A copy of them. Thank you. And that 12 would have been from your project binder? 13 A: Yes, they are. 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I'd like to make this 15 the next exhibit please? 16 THE REGISTRAR: P-1671, Your Honour. 17 18 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1671: Document Number 1000858. 19 Handwritten Police notes of 20 Trevor Richardson, August 30- 21 September 14, 1995. (Notebook 22 dedicated to Ipperwash) 23 24 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 25 Q: All right. And can you tell us


1 please what the circumstances of your first involvement 2 with this matter was? 3 A: Yes. On August 30th, 1995, when I 4 arrive at the office. Detective Sergeant Mark Wright was 5 our immediate supervisor at the time and he advised us 6 that the Ipperwash Provincial Park was closing on 7 September 4th for the season, being Labour Day, and that 8 there has been suspected rumours around that the Stoney 9 Point First Nations people that are on the Camp would -- 10 wanted to take over the Park. 11 Q: All right. And why -- what was the 12 purpose of his relaying this to you as you understood it? 13 A: Well, as it turned out he put me in 14 the project plan as being a primary investigator and file 15 coordinator for the project. 16 Q: You say he put -- put you in the 17 plan, which plan was that? 18 A: Project Maple. 19 Q: Thank you. And as I look at your 20 note of August the 30th, 1995, it apparently provided you 21 with a little bit more background about the operation at 22 that time? 23 A: Yes, he had. 24 Q: And first of all can you recollect 25 what he told you about the policing operation and what


1 your role would be? 2 A: Yes, these notes are just very 3 general; they're not verbatim, just point form of the 4 highlights of our conversation. And he advises that the 5 Provincial Government has told the MNR and the OPP to do 6 what is necessary to prevent the Park from being taken 7 over. And as a result of the meeting I was -- they had a 8 meeting on the 29th of August that I was not in 9 attendance. 10 Q: "They" being? 11 A: Mark Wright and I assume the Command 12 staff. 13 Q: Thank you. 14 A: And they appointed me as the primary 15 investigator in charge of any criminal offences that 16 would -- may occur. 17 Q: All right. And do you recall 18 anything else of significance from that meeting? 19 A: Yes, he wanted me to do up a -- a 20 part of the project plan. He wanted me to do up arrest 21 teams; the possible charges that could be laid if any 22 were -- were observed; how they would be released; get in 23 contact with the Ident Unit and have an officer assigned 24 to do photographs and stuff like that; put up a bit of a 25 contingency plan for the evacuation of area residences


1 that need it. 2 And there was to be a meeting with -- on 3 this project plan the next day that I wouldn't be able to 4 attend so I had Detective Sergeant Randy Parent attend 5 for me. 6 Q: All right. Now, I noted in your 7 notes you -- you have written: 8 "The Provincial Government has told MNR 9 and OPP to do what is necessary to 10 prevent Park from being taken over. 11 Now, what -- can you elaborate on what 12 Mark Wright told you in connection with this? 13 A: That's just what he said. I can only 14 assume that the Provincial Government who, through the 15 MNR, had -- were in charge of the Park and that they 16 didn't want the Park to be taken over so they said that, 17 you know, Get your ducks in a row basically and, you 18 know, do what you can to prevent it from being taken 19 over. 20 Q: All right. And at the time did you 21 have any concerns about -- about the concept that the 22 Provincial Government had apparently told MNR and -- and 23 the -- the police to do what was necessary to prevent a 24 Park takeover? 25 A: Did I have any concerns?


1 Q: Yes. 2 A: No. 3 Q: All right. Now, were you advised by 4 Mark Wright that you would be assigned any formal 5 intelligence component linked to you function as primary 6 investigator and file coordinator? 7 A: No, I was not. 8 Q: Did you understand that it would be 9 part of your job to assess the validity and value of 10 intelligence coming up through any intelligence unit 11 assigned to this operation? 12 A: Not to my knowledge, no, I was not. 13 Q: And as -- to help us understand your 14 role as a primary investigator can you explain 15 essentially what is involved or can you walk us through 16 the step -- the essential steps in a -- in a criminal 17 investigation process? 18 A: Well, as a primary investigator what 19 I had was a team of investigators that would -- if an 20 incident occurred that I would coordinate that incident 21 and have the officers go out and do interviews or gather 22 whatever evidence they could gather. We'd put a brief 23 together, make sure that charges are laid, et cetera. 24 And that's -- that's basically what we're instructed to 25 do.


1 Q: All right. And can you explain what 2 goes in -- or what an arrest package is? 3 A: Yes. Arrest package is when a person 4 gets arrested; make sure that the identification unit has 5 the photographs and fingerprints; conditions of release 6 would be in there. And the Crown Attorney would be 7 notified that the incident had happened and charges have 8 been laid. Putting a brief together, stuff like that. 9 Q: All right. 10 A: Would be all in the package. 11 Q: And in terms of it being in charge of 12 the arrest teams, how would that work? 13 A: Well the arrest teams -- when there's 14 a lot of people in a gathering, not every officer would 15 be -- like two (2) officers wouldn't arrest twenty (20) 16 people, you'd have twenty (20) officers arresting twenty 17 (20) people. 18 So even though those Officers may not be 19 in charge of doing the criminal investigation, what 20 happens is is that the officer would arrest somebody, he 21 may not even know who they are, they may not tell him 22 their name, but you get them to take a picture of them. 23 So it would be the Arresting Officer and the accused. 24 And then when they go back to the -- back 25 to the Detachment or whatever, that Officer can identify


1 the person that he actually arrested, even though he 2 doesn't know his name, with the photograph. That's 3 what -- 4 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And is that the 5 function also of the -- well what's the function of the 6 Identification Unit? 7 A: Well that's what they'd be -- they'd 8 be doing some photographing of the scene, of the arrests, 9 of the -- they'd be doing fingerprints for us and stuff 10 like that. 11 Q: Fair enough. And was it your 12 anticipation based on your discussion with Mark Wright 13 that in the event of a attempted Park takeover that you 14 would be in charge of the arrest teams sent out to deal 15 with that? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. And was there any 18 discussion at this meeting as to how you would carry that 19 out? 20 A: I think it would be very basic. You 21 know, as people came onto the Park that any criminal 22 activity that was observed that they would be arrested 23 for that criminal activity. And there was officers 24 there, and again, going through the photographs and that, 25 they'd be taken back to Forest Detachment and proper


1 charges would be laid and they'd be released or held in 2 custody, depending on the severity of the incident, and 3 held for bail or released or whatever. 4 Q: All right. So nothing unusual about 5 this situation that you were alerted to? 6 A: No. 7 Q: Can you explain the importance of 8 fact checking in a criminal investigation? 9 A: Excuse me? 10 Q: Can you explain the importance of 11 fact checking in a criminal investigation? 12 A: Oh, whenever you get information from 13 a witness and his statement and that, I mean to you do 14 double check that what they have said is valid or some of 15 it's valid. Some of it may not be. You can have five 16 (5) people look at the same incident and tell you 17 different stories because everybody perceives things 18 differently. 19 And so you'd gather it all up together and 20 come up with a -- whatever is common between all the 21 statements and observations by people. 22 Q: All right. And how do you do that? 23 Is there a -- you know is there a protocol on how you -- 24 did you do that? 25 A: No, I mean, your basic computer


1 checks and follow up on what they say. If they said they 2 talked to Bob, then you go and talk to Bob and make sure 3 that what he said to them is exactly what happened. And 4 you just continue to follow up on statements and 5 witnesses and observations. 6 Q: Okay. Fair enough. 7 A: It's very basic actually. 8 Q: Based on your discussion with Mark 9 Wright, did you understand it to be part of your role 10 under this project, intelligence aside, to verify all 11 information relating to possible criminal activities of 12 the occupiers, regardless of the source of information? 13 A: We would follow up on any information 14 that we were given with criminal activity, absolutely. 15 Q: All right. But was you -- was your 16 focus, as you understood it, restricted to fact checking 17 in relation to criminal activity? 18 A: Yes, I would say that's -- that was 19 my primary role was worrying about the criminal activity 20 that may have occurred. 21 Q: And just so I understand, whose 22 responsibility is that ultimately to verify or -- verify 23 certain facts in the criminal investigation? 24 A: The criminal investigator. And it 25 doesn't have to be a primary investigator but -- I mean


1 in a lot of cases you're on there by yourself. So you do 2 it yourself if you're the only investigator on a criminal 3 investigation. 4 Q: Okay. So the person initially taking 5 the statement, for example, from a complainant? 6 A: Yes. Unless it's a major -- like a 7 homicide or something like that where you'd have five 8 (5), or six (6) or seven (7) investigators out taking 9 statements and then it comes back and that would be my 10 job to read those statements over and back check all the 11 stuff. 12 Q: Okay. Fair enough. Now, did you 13 discuss with Mark Wright who your direct reporting 14 responsibilities would be to under this project? 15 A: I believed it to be him. 16 Q: "To him"? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. And what did you understand 19 his role to be? 20 A: He was going to be the coordinator of 21 the project. Like, he wasn't going to be the Incident 22 Commander or that, but he was going to be a couple steps 23 down from that. But he would be a part of the whole 24 project plan as far as all the information coming in. 25 Q: All right. So you would be reporting


1 to him as opposed to the Incident Commander in the normal 2 course? 3 A: Generally speaking, yes. Once in a 4 while if Mark Wright wasn't there you'd have to talk to 5 Inspector Carson or whoever. But, yes, generally, you'd 6 pass it on through Mark Wright. 7 Q: All right. And would you be 8 considered a Unit Commander? 9 A: For -- for the criminal 10 investigations, yes, for lack of a better word, yes. 11 Q: Okay. Is there a better word? 12 A: I can't think of one. 13 Q: All right. Fair enough. Thank you. 14 And who was to be part of your criminal investigation 15 team? 16 A: Initially it was Mark Dew, Dave 17 Maddocks, George Speck. 18 Q: All right. And amongst the grouping 19 did you have a -- someone who you would have designate as 20 your alternate? 21 A: It probably would have been George 22 Speck or Mark Dew. I think George Speck would have been 23 first because he was from Forrest Detachment and knew the 24 area, knew the -- knew the people in Lambton County and 25 up through that area.


1 Q: All right. And just you said 2 "probably would have"; do you recall who you chose as 3 your alternate? 4 A: No, I -- I don't think I did. 5 Q: And as of August 30th, had you heard 6 of the Project Maple plan? 7 A: I don't think it was called Project 8 Maple at that time. I think they were just, it was a 9 project and they were just starting to gather it up at 10 that time. 11 Q: All right. And did you discuss what 12 police officers would assist you in the Identification 13 Unit? 14 A: I went down to the Identification 15 Unit and Paul Evans was assigned. 16 Q: What about for the arrest teams? 17 A: I -- the arrest team, I think I left 18 that with George Speck and they were going to get a hold 19 of the uniforms in that area to be a part of the arrest 20 team. 21 Q: So the local -- local police 22 officers? 23 A: Local, yes. And we had some 24 policewomen coming in to -- to assist. 25 Q: Okay. Now, did Don Bell's name come


1 up in this first conversation? 2 A: No, it did not. 3 Q: Did the intelligence function come up 4 at all in the first conversation? 5 A: No. 6 Q: Did you know Don Bell at this time? 7 A: Yes. Yes. 8 Q: And who did you understand him to be? 9 A: He was in charge of the Joint Forces 10 Operation and of intelligence in London. 11 Q: Had you worked with him before? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And in what context? 14 A: Doing surveillance and stuff like 15 that, but not as an intelligence function but as a 16 criminal investigation function. 17 Q: Had you worked with him though in his 18 capacity as an intelligence officer? 19 A: No. 20 Q: No? 21 A: Not until -- not at this time. 22 Q: Yes. 23 A: Later on, yes. 24 Q: Fair enough. Was it your 25 understanding that the intelligence team would be under


1 your supervision and responsibility? 2 A: No, I did not know that. 3 Q: If that had been raised with you 4 would you have raised a concern about that? 5 A: I don't think I'd have raised a 6 concern but I certainly would have got Don Bell's 7 guidance as that was his area. And if I was going to be 8 the intelligence coordinator for this project without Don 9 Bell then I would have certainly got an intelligence 10 officer to give me a hand with it. 11 Q: All right. And that's because you 12 didn't have that basic expertise and training? 13 A: Correct. 14 Q: And did you have any under -- well, 15 did you have an understanding as to what distinguished 16 raw data or information from intelligence? 17 A: Did I know what that was? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: Well, I guess I knew what it was, but 20 I -- I didn't have the training or anything to do the 21 reliability checks and all that stuff that goes with the 22 intelligence doing that. It's a different function 23 altogether. 24 Q: Fair enough. Thank you. Now, at 25 this time what did you understand your primary duties to


1 be prior to the occupation of the Park? 2 A: To investigate any criminal activity 3 that was reported; break and enters, mischiefs, any of 4 that -- incidents that happened. 5 Q: All right. And what did you do in 6 order to discharge that function? 7 A: I went up into the -- I went and saw 8 George Speck. I went up to Forest Detachment. I took at 9 the Park area and -- and the Ipperwash area because I was 10 not familiar with that and the Camp and -- and then on 11 the 4th of September I went into the Park there and was 12 with Mark Dew and Bryan Gast and observing the people and 13 the -- the initial occupiers. 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: And the campers that were there. 16 Q: And that's on September the 4th? 17 A: Correct. 18 Q: All right. Now, you indicated that 19 you were informed that there was to be a meeting on 20 September the 1st of the key personnel to -- to discuss 21 this policing operation? 22 A: That's right. 23 Q: And you advised Mr. Wright that you 24 were unable to go? 25 A: That's correct.


1 Q: And why were you unable to go? 2 A: I was due for a day off. 3 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And did Mark 4 Wright express any concerns at the fact that you were 5 going to miss this briefing? 6 A: No, he did no. 7 Q: And were any plans made for you to be 8 brought up to speed or to be briefed on -- on the 9 contents of this meeting? 10 A: Yes, on -- I believe on the 4th. 11 Q: All right. Do you recall whether you 12 had any discussions on the 30th with -- with the OPP 13 Legal Branch? 14 A: Yes, I did. 15 Q: And you're referring to your notes. 16 Do you recall what the purpose of that conversation was? 17 A: Just to confirm with them that the 18 charges that we believe may occur were proper and that 19 they -- the Legal Branch for the OPP, they'll do some 20 further studies to make sure that there hasn't been a 21 court decision somewhere that null and voids that charge, 22 or -- or tells you that you need more evidence or less 23 evidence or whatever, so they can do some -- some 24 background on that as well. 25 Q: Okay. And that conversation occurred


1 at 10:40 a.m., I believe, and it's at page 2 of your 2 notes? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And I see that there's also a 5 reference to a discussion with respect to a court order. 6 Do you recall what that court order was about? 7 A: That's -- it was a -- we discussed 8 what would happen before a court order or what happens 9 after a court order, and what sections apply and what 10 don't apply. 11 Q: Okay. It would -- 12 A: There was no court order at that 13 time. This is like trying to keep ahead of the situation 14 that may occur. 15 Q: Okay. Fair enough. I guess what I'm 16 interested in knowing is was what court order was being 17 anticipated here? 18 A: I would imagine a court order from 19 the MNR for -- like an injunction to -- 20 Q: Was there -- were you aware of any 21 plan with respect that -- with respect to an injunction? 22 A: Not at that time I don't think but we 23 had discussed whether -- you know, what sections would 24 apply if there was a court order given, without a court 25 order, stuff like that.


1 Q: All right. Fair enough. And did you 2 also have a conversation with Diane Foster that day? 3 A: Yes, I did. 4 Q: And what was -- what was the purpose 5 of that conversation? 6 A: Well, she was the local Assistant 7 Crown Attorney for Lambton County and it's my policy to 8 always involve the Crown Attorney and notify them when 9 anything has happened or may happen and it's a courtesy 10 call. 11 Q: A courtesy call? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Okay. To give them a heads up that 14 they may -- 15 A: Well -- 16 Q: -- get another call? 17 A: Yeah, well if they -- just in case 18 there's forty (40) people arrested and they got to do 19 bail hearing's on Tuesday or something, you know. 20 Q: Okay. Fair enough. Did you have any 21 substantive conversation with her with respect to 22 charges, grounds for arrests, anything like that? 23 A: We -- I went through the -- the list 24 of possible charges that we were considering and she 25 agreed with them all, yes.


1 Q: Okay. And just for clarity what was 2 that list of charges that were being contemplated as 3 possible? 4 A: I don't have them here with me but, 5 you know, it would be trespassing... 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: You -- 10 A: There was trespassing and, you know, 11 break and enters, entering the Park unlawfully. There -- 12 there'd be a bunch of charges; any assaults, assault 13 police officers, potential offences that may occur. 14 Q: Okay. And it -- it -- I understand 15 that those charges that were being contemplated was 16 ultimately reflected in -- in the Project Maple plan? 17 A: Yes they were. 18 Q: All right. And did the charges 19 include charges for trespass? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: All right. Now, were you aware that 22 surveillance equipment was being set up? 23 A: I understood that they were putting 24 in some cameras, yes, in the Park. 25 Q: All right. And how involved were you


1 in that aspect of the phase? 2 A: Not at all, just I knew that it was 3 occurring. 4 Q: All right. And to your knowledge had 5 Checkpoints been established yet? 6 A: No, I don't think they had been 7 established where the checkpoints would be. 8 Q: Okay. Were you -- did you play any 9 role with respect to the establishment and roles of the 10 checkpoints? 11 A: Where they'd be set up and stuff like 12 that? 13 Q: Yes. 14 A: No, I did not. 15 Q: Or what their purpose would be -- 16 A: We discussed what their purpose would 17 be and that's why I called the Legal Branch as well as 18 apprizing the Crown Attorney that they'd be -- 19 Q: And what was your understanding as to 20 what the purpose of these checkpoints would be? 21 A: Well if they -- it the Park was being 22 occupied that the checkpoints would be set up to notify 23 people of the potential danger down there, if there was 24 one. To see if they are local people or people from out 25 of town that are just being nosy.


1 To make sure there was no violations; 2 Highway Traffic Act or Criminal Code violations. To 3 gather the names and addresses and stuff of the people in 4 the vehicles; drivers license obviously from the driver; 5 verbal from the passenger on their consent. And just to 6 make sure everybody was safe and everybody knew what was 7 going on. 8 Q: And did the functioning or the 9 information re -- that would be received from the 10 Checkpoints would that come to your attention for any 11 reason as the primary investigator? 12 A: Initially, I think -- the Officer -- 13 when the Officers came back from the Checkpoints, if I 14 was there they would tell me or tell their Sergeants and 15 eventually it would get to us and then I'd push it up. 16 Because as -- as we already said there was 17 no Intelligence Officer to coordinate that information. 18 So there would be myself or George Speck or somebody 19 would get that information eventually. 20 Q: Fair enough. And if we would go -- 21 you would go to Tab 4, this is Inquiry Document 2005608, 22 these seem to be the notebook entries with respect to 23 September -- sorry August the 30th. 24 Is that from your general notebook? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: Okay. And does that reflect -- is 2 that relative to your duties with respect to Ipperwash? 3 A: Yes it's just very brief, on-duty, 4 off- duty -- 5 Q: Right -- 6 A: -- just what I was doing. It's more 7 of an administrative book, really. 8 Q: Fair enough. Just as you describe. 9 Let's make this the next Exhibit, please? 10 THE REGISTRAR: P-1672, Your Honour. 11 12 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1672: Document Number 2005608. 13 Handwritten notebook entries 14 of Trevor Richardson, 15 September 07 to September 16, 16 1995. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 19 Q: Now, did you continue with your 20 Ipperwash related duties on August the 31st? 21 A: I have to check, just a second. 22 Q: Certainly. 23 A: Yes I did. 24 Q: All right. And can you give us a 25 synopsis of what you did on August the 31st relative to


1 your -- I assume this to be relative to your role as 2 primary, criminal investigator? 3 A: Yes I met with Detective Sergeant 4 Randy Parent in Chatham and him and him and I went up to 5 Forest. We met with George Speck and we had a discussion 6 with him. Met with the technical -- I guess Chatham 7 Detachment or Kent County technical advisor which was 8 Kevin Robson at the time and he was discussing about the 9 cameras being installed in the Park. 10 And then we went to -- down to the Park 11 and -- just to take a look at the lay of the land, so to 12 speak. And spoke with Sergeant Stan Korosec of the ERT 13 team. And he was going to do some patrols on Monday in 14 uniform and marked cruisers. 15 And spoke with Mark Dew who was doing 16 security detail up at the Park and I told him I would be 17 up there on Monday. And again, talked with a couple of 18 guys that were doing the camera installs, just spoke with 19 them, I believe, on the phone. 20 And spoke with Inspector Carson and told 21 him what him and -- what myself and Randy Parent had done 22 that day with George Speck and then went back to Chatham. 23 Q: Now, was that your first discussion 24 with the Incident Commander? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: Had you had an opportunity to work 2 with John Carson as Incident Commander before? 3 A: Not as an Incident Commander but him 4 and I were on the Chatham Detachment as Corporals for 5 years, before he got promoted. 6 Q: And did you have any substantive 7 discussions with him about what your position and roles 8 would be within the overall policing operation? 9 A: No, not with Inspector Carson. Mark 10 Wright had told me what my duties would be. 11 Q: All right. Did you have any 12 conversations with him with what -- what became Project 13 Maple? 14 A: Not at this time. 15 Q: Not at this time. All right. Did 16 you tell him that you would be unable to attend at the 17 September 1 meeting? 18 A: No. I told him I wouldn't be there, 19 that Randy Parent would be there. 20 Q: All right. And he didn't raise any 21 concerns? 22 A: No, he did not. 23 Q: All right. And you indicated that 24 you had a day off on September 1st? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And was that through to September 2 3rd? 3 A: Yes, it was. 4 Q: And so did you have any Ipperwash 5 related duties or conversations between September 1st and 6 3rd? 7 A: No, I did not. 8 Q: And proceeding to September 4th, 9 1995 -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Vella, 11 would this be a good point to take a morning break. 12 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Absolutely. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Before you 14 start September 4th. 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It's a very good point. 16 Thank you. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll take a 18 break now. 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 20 for fifteen (15) minutes. 21 22 --- Upon recessing at 10:26 a.m. 23 --- Upon resuming at 10:45 a.m. 24 25 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now


1 resumed, please be seated. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 3 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: Moving on to September 4th, 1995 7 then, in page 7 of your notes, that's Exhibit 1671. 8 What was the first thing you did that day? 9 A: When I went in the office I met with 10 Randy Parent and he gave me a Reader's Digest version of 11 what happened at the meeting on September 1st that I 12 wasn't able to attend to. 13 Q: All right. And did he advise you 14 what your roles and tasks were under this program? 15 A: No, he didn't. I already knew what 16 my -- my tasks were. But he just kind of filled in some 17 of the vacant spots that we didn't know about, like the 18 logistics officers and stuff like that that we'd be -- 19 we'd have to get a hold of or had been got a hold of by 20 Mark Wright. 21 Q: And so it was as you have described, 22 or at least your roles and responsibilities were as you 23 had understood them, based on your conversation with Mark 24 Wright? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: If you would go to -- I'm going to 2 take you to the minutes of the September 1st meeting. 3 It's Exhibit P-421, Inquiry document 3000574. And I 4 think you've got an excerpt of them but I think you 5 should have the entire copy. 6 I wonder if you could hand it up, please? 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've got it. 11 I've got it. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 16 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Would you give the 17 Commissioner a complete set of the minutes, please? 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 21 Q: Now these have been identified as the 22 minutes of the meeting of September the 1st, which you 23 missed. And first -- my first question is: Were you 24 ever provided with a copy of these minutes? 25 A: No, I was not.


1 Q: All right. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: Just give me a second. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: All right. Now, on page 2 -- can you 10 just give me a second, Commissioner, I've got the wrong 11 copy of the minutes here? 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: Nothing like leaving your working 16 copy of the document behind. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The copy 21 that you're looking for is marked up. I'm just hoping I 22 don't have it, I've got a clean copy. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: No, you -- I don't 24 think you do. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 4 Q: What we can do is we can go to page 3 5 of the -- the minutes and there's a section that's 6 entitled, Primary Investigation, Detective Sergeant 7 Richardson? 8 A: Yes, on page 3? 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: It indicates that you are not only in 12 charge of the -- all criminal investigation, but also to 13 prepare the paperwork and charges that go along with 14 that. Was that consistent with your understanding of 15 your role? 16 A: Yes, it was. 17 Q: And that Officer Speck would be your 18 scene investigator? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And what is a scene investigator? 21 A: That would be Mark Wright. 22 Q: No, I'm sorry. All right. What -- 23 what's a scene investigator though? 24 A: Well, it's the overall -- the overall 25 scene, the overall incident.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: We're just a criminal unit, as you 3 put it, so just one (1) aspect of the -- the whole 4 project. 5 Q: Okay. Fair enough. It also 6 indicated that Ident is involved with taking photos at 7 the time of the arrest. You spoke about that; that was 8 consistent with your understanding of your function? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: It also lists you as file 11 coordinator. Can you tell us what you understood that to 12 entail? 13 A: As file coordinator you have to get 14 all the statements, synopsize them, put them in 15 alphabetical order or whatever -- whatever file 16 coordination you -- you choose, photographs, anything 17 that comes in you put it into a file -- filing cabinets 18 and you number them and, you know, make it all that's 19 organized. 20 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And I note that 21 there's a reference towards the bottom: 22 "Janet, Records Controller. Anything 23 that Richardson feels needs to be typed 24 with regards to crime and 25 intelligence."


1 And was it your understanding that you had 2 records responsibility with respect to the intelligence 3 function? 4 A: I never knew that; honestly, I 5 didn't. 6 Q: Okay. And if we go to page 4 and the 7 top paragraph I'll just read it: 8 "Intelligence will be under Trevor. 9 Analyst will be under Trevor as well. 10 That person will not have any definite 11 responsibilities, will be computer 12 literate to assist with intelligence 13 information to be entered into a 14 database. This will be Jimmy Dyke." 15 Did you see that? 16 A: No, I did not. 17 Q: I'm sorry, page 4 -- 18 A: Oh, I see it now, yes. 19 Q: Oh, okay -- 20 A: But, I didn't see it prior to -- 21 Q: Oh. Did you understand that 22 intelligence the Intelligence Unit and function was to be 23 under your direction or under you? 24 A: If I was told that it would have been 25 in my notes.


1 Q: All right. 2 A: Honestly, it -- 3 Q: And did you come to learn that that 4 was your responsibility at any time between September 4th 5 and 6th, 1995? 6 A: No, I did not. 7 Q: Did you know that you were to be 8 assigned responsibility for the analyst in this 9 operation? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Did you come to know that at any time 12 between September 4th and 6th? 13 A: No, I did not. 14 Q: Did you know who was Jimmy Dyke? 15 A: I know Jimmy Dyke, yes. 16 Q: And did you understand that you were 17 going to have any type of responsibility in relation to 18 Jim Dyke? 19 A: No, I did not. 20 Q: Or in relation to Don Bell? 21 A: No. 22 Q: Or in relation to Darryl Whitehead? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Had you been at this meeting and 25 privy to this discussion, would you have raised any


1 concerns about your ability or suitability to perform 2 this type of role in this kind of a policing operation? 3 A: Well, I would have taken the role as 4 I had the primary investigator, but I would have done 5 some background work to make sure that I had people in 6 place to do the intelligence work, because I wasn't an 7 Intelligence Officer. 8 Q: In other words, you wouldn't have 9 exercised any decision making authority or discretion 10 with respect to the intelligence tasks? Had you been -- 11 A: Sorry -- 12 Q: -- would you have accepted that 13 responsibility? 14 A: I would have taken the responsibility 15 of being the intelligence coordinator if they had given 16 it to me and I knew about it -- 17 Q: Okay. 18 A: -- but I would have got somebody in 19 there that knew the intelligence work. West Region had 20 Intelligence Officers, one in Lambton County that I would 21 definitely had called up and had him do the work for me, 22 or assist me with the work. 23 Q: All right. So as you put it, you 24 would have been more or less the coordinator but not the 25 decision maker within that unit?


1 A: For the intelligence work, yes. 2 Q: All right. Thank you. When did you 3 first find out that you were to have responsibility, of 4 any sort, over the Intelligence Unit under Project Maple? 5 A: I never did. That's why Detective 6 Sergeant Don Bell and Jimmy Dyke came up on the 5th. 7 That was their role, as I understood it. 8 Q: All right. Did you have any 9 understanding as to what the intelligence function would 10 be under the -- under this project? 11 A: I assumed that it would be, you know, 12 finding out whose on the -- whose in the Park, whose at 13 the Camp, any information on the individuals, any people 14 coming onto the Camp that didn't belong there, you know, 15 and then passing that on and telling, you know, Inspector 16 Carson or Mark Wright or whoever. 17 Q: What their results were? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Yes. All right. So that's what you 20 assumed it would have been, but you weren't specifically 21 briefed as to what their function and role was, in fact? 22 A: No, I was not. 23 Q: Did you understand that you would 24 have the availability of an Intelligence Unit to assist 25 you with your criminal investigation work?


1 A: Up until this time the word 2 intelligence really never popped up, to be quite honest, 3 not in my presence anyway. 4 Q: Fair enough. 5 A: Obviously it did on the 21st -- or on 6 the 1st of September, but... 7 Q: All right. Now, on page 6 of the 8 minutes there's a reference at the bottom -- I'm sorry 9 I'll wait until you get there. 10 It says: 11 "Crime has to make sure that Ident 12 takes pictures of everything, i.e. of 13 the Forest Detachment garage, so they 14 have a picture history of everything 15 we've done." 16 Now, first of all, was that consistent 17 with your understanding of -- of part of the function of 18 your unit? 19 A: Well, of Ident, yes. 20 Q: Now -- 21 A: But identification is an assistant 22 unit. 23 Q: Yes. 24 A: They assist, whatever you need. So 25 that's -- that's what they do, so.


1 Q: Okay. Fair enough. Now, after this 2 briefing then with Detective Sergeant Parent -- 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: -- you -- you went to the park at 5 about 11:10 a.m.? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: All right. And what was the purpose 8 of going to the park? 9 A: Meeting with Mark Dew and Bryan Gast. 10 Q: All right. And why were you meeting 11 with those individuals? 12 A: Just to see how things are going up 13 there with the campers and the First Nations people from 14 the camp. 15 Q: All right. And you indicated that -- 16 that, at least, Constable Dew was part of your team? 17 A: Yes, he was. 18 Q: How about Constable Gast? 19 A: No, he was not a part of the team at 20 -- at that time. 21 Q: And did you receive an update from 22 those officers? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: What were you told? 25 A: That the evening before one of the


1 campers was beaten up and his dog was killed. 2 Q: And the -- why would you be someone 3 that they would report that kind of information to? 4 A: Criminal activity. 5 Q: Okay. Did you direct any follow up 6 or any action as a result of -- of this information? 7 A: Well, they -- they had tried to find 8 the -- the victim and apparently they couldn't find him. 9 Q: All right. So that was your -- 10 A: As I understand it, yeah. 11 Q: All right. And then did you receive 12 a call from Detective Sergeant Wright -- 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: -- Staff Sergeant Wright at about 15 12:30? 16 A: Yes, I did. 17 Q: And that's referenced at page 9 of 18 your notes? 19 A: Yes. Yes, it is. 20 Q: Could you tell us what -- what the 21 purpose of that telephone call was? 22 A: Well, he had received information, 23 and I'm not sure who from, but he advised me that the -- 24 there was apparently a sequence of events that the 25 Natives would be entering the park and they're going to


1 tell everybody, Get off the land. 2 And if it happens, the first call should 3 go to the MNR Les Kobayashi who will call George speck, 4 and if we get there first then Speckie's supposed to call 5 the MNR. 6 And they were supposed to approach the 7 occupiers and tell them to leave or they'd be charged 8 under the Petty Trespass Act. 9 Q: Okay. And what, if anything, did you 10 -- did you do as a result of that call? 11 A: I -- I spoke with Inspector Carson 12 about twenty (20) minutes later at 12:50 -- 13 Q: Yes. 14 A: -- and advised him of the assault 15 incident. And he advised to make sure we still enforce 16 Matheson Drive, and to be careful. 17 Q: Now, what did you understand his 18 directions to mean with respect to enforcing Matheson 19 Drive? 20 A: Well, Matheson Drive is a little road 21 that separates the camp from the park, and it kind of 22 goes in behind and it goes all the way down to the beach, 23 and he just wanted to make sure that we still enforced it 24 for HTA violations or whatever, and that we didn't -- 25 abandoning it as a buffer zone, type thing, between the


1 camp and the park. 2 So that's why I took the be. 3 Q: And did you dispatch officers to do 4 that? 5 A: They -- the officers were already 6 doing that and -- Stan Korosec's team was already doing 7 that. 8 Q: Fair enough. And did you raise any 9 concerns with Inspector Carson about the ability of the 10 police to -- to continue to enforce, if you will, or have 11 control over Matheson Drive in the event of a park 12 takeover? 13 A: No, I didn't. 14 Q: All right. Did you have a concern? 15 A: No. 16 Q: It was your anticipation that the 17 police would be able to maintain control of Matheson 18 Drive in the event of a park takeover? 19 A: Well, I assume -- well, I was hoping 20 they could, yes. 21 Q: Okay. All right. And just returning 22 for a moment to the discussion that you had with 23 Detective Sergeant Wright, did you receive further 24 information with him about what -- what would happen in 25 the event that the First Nation persons attempted to take


1 over the park? 2 A: Yes. He -- he advised me the 3 sequence that he hoped would happen. Yes. 4 Q: All right. And can you relay what 5 your understanding of that sequence of events would be? 6 A: Well, that the -- if the MNR arrived 7 at the scene first, that they would call George Speck. 8 He was going to be the OPP contact and -- and if the OPP 9 got there first then George Speck would call the MNR 10 office -- officer and that together they would approach 11 the occupiers and tell them to leave, and that the MNR 12 will be going and getting an injunction, and that George 13 Speck and the uniformed officers were to stay on the Park 14 property. 15 Q: And did you foresee any difficulty 16 with respect to the feasibility of carrying out this 17 proposal? 18 A: At the time, no. I mean one (1) 19 concern obviously is that if we were trying to keep 20 people off the Park how long do you do that? How many 21 people do you need and do you do -- to do it twenty-four 22 seven (24/7) for like five (5) years, or what do you do? 23 I mean that's, you know, going a little 24 overboard but I mean it's a possibility. And I mean 25 that's not feasible that we could be there forever, you


1 know. But -- 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: -- you know, I -- I was hoping that 4 the, you know, if the MNR had to get a court order or 5 whatever that everybody would abide by it and let the 6 court process between the MNR and the First Nations 7 people go as it goes through the court system. 8 Q: All right. And was it part of your 9 role as primary investigator in any event to -- to be -- 10 to participate or to ensure that the Park not be taken 11 over or perhaps from a policing perspective? 12 A: No. 13 Q: Because your -- your job really was 14 to work up any criminal charges that might feasibly arise 15 from -- from activities of the occupiers? 16 A: Well, not work them up but 17 investigate them. 18 Q: Investigate them, okay. 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Did you understand what the -- the 21 main objective of the policing operation was at this 22 time? 23 A: The main objective? 24 Q: Yes. 25 A: For the police I would say to keep


1 the peace and -- and let the court process -- process go 2 as it does between the MNR and the First Nations people. 3 Q: All right. 4 A: And, you know, make sure that 5 everybody's peaceful and nobody gets hurt and that was my 6 understanding. 7 Q: All right. Had either Detective 8 Sergeant -- or Sergeant Parent, or Mark Wright, or the 9 Incident Commander advised you that the objective was 10 containment and negotiation to a peaceful resolution? 11 A: That was the standard line, yes. 12 Q: Okay. When you say, "that was the 13 standard line," was that -- what do you mean, for this 14 purpose? 15 A: It was -- it was in the project plan 16 eventually, so. 17 Q: Okay. And did you have any ability - 18 - or any concern about the ability to execute the 19 containment part of the plan in the event of an 20 occupation of the Park? 21 A: Well, as I explained, trying to 22 prevent people from coming on a park or onto a large 23 piece of property, I mean that is a concern. I mean, you 24 need a lot of people to do that to make sure that 25 somebody doesn't slip through or whatever, but...


1 Q: Did the proximity of the Army Camp to 2 the Park pose any additional concerns? 3 A: Well, certainly. I mean you could 4 throw a baseball across the road so I mean it's -- it's 5 right there so it's not like they have to travel 10 miles 6 to come and occupy it or whatever. It's -- they can just 7 walk cross, run across, drive across, whatever. 8 Q: Okay. And after your conversations 9 then with Mark Wright and -- and John Carson what next 10 did you do of relevance? 11 A: I spoke with George Speck and advised 12 him about what would happened if the occupiers came 13 across. Spoke with Paul Evans from the Ident Unit and he 14 had just finished video -- videotaping the MNR buildings 15 on the Park. 16 Q: When you say, "videotaping the MNR 17 buildings," what do you mean by that? 18 A: Well, on -- in the Park there there 19 was -- I have to recall now there a maintenance shed, 20 there was a restaurant/store combo on the -- on the Park, 21 there was a front gate kiosk. And I think he just took 22 general pictures of the Park so we would know the general 23 layout of the Park. 24 Q: Okay. Fair enough. 25 A: Then George Speck called me back and


1 said that he had -- talking to the MNR representative, 2 Les Kobayashi, and they were all on the same wavelength 3 now and they knew what the sequence of events would be if 4 -- if and if and when it happened. 5 Q: All right. 6 A: And then just sat with Mark and Bryan 7 Gast and kind of watched the activity. 8 Q: I understand that about 1:30 you were 9 patrolling the beach and campgrounds? 10 A: Yes, walking. 11 Q: And when you say, campgrounds, you 12 mean the camp part of the Park? 13 A: Correct. 14 Q: All right. And did you observe 15 anything of note during your patrolling of the Park area 16 that afternoon? 17 A: At approximately 4:00 in the 18 afternoon, Wayde Jacklin came down Matheson Drive in a 19 marked cruiser. And he got down to the beach near the 20 water and he turned the car around and there would had to 21 have been a campfire there on the road. 22 Q: On Matheson Drive? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Okay. 25 A: And he got out of the cruiser and was


1 kicking the fire -- whatever was there, I mean it wasn't 2 a live fire, it was a dead fire, but, all the debris off 3 the road. 4 And then a car suddenly came out of the 5 crowd, there was a bunch of First Nations people on the 6 Army Camp site and they were mulling around down near the 7 beach by Matheson Drive and then all the sudden a blue 8 Trans Am, Firebird type vehicle came out of the crowd and 9 came up right -- and blocked Wayde Jacklin in. 10 And the passenger in my estimation booted 11 the door open. The passenger door opened which hit the 12 cruiser and dented the bumper. And who was later 13 identified as Stewart George. And a bit of a 14 confrontation then started. 15 Q: And how far away were you from the 16 scene as it occurred? 17 A: 20/25 feet. 30 feet. 18 Q: All right. And were you able to 19 hear, overhear the -- any verbal exchange? 20 A: It was a heated discussion about, Get 21 off our property, get off our land. Wayde Jacklin just 22 saying, Hey this is, you know, Matheson Drive, it's 23 public property. And so that type of stuff was going on. 24 Q: And this is that segment of Matheson 25 Drive that -- that leads towards the lake?


1 A: Yes, it kind of goes in a -- goes 2 east -- yes, east and then south towards the beach, I 3 guess. 4 Q: Right, from Army Camp Road -- 5 A: Army Camp or -- I guess it's 6 opposite. I guess it's kind of hard to tell with the 7 road. It's almost a -- goes down to the beach and it 8 dead ends at the water. 9 Q: Yes -- 10 A: And it separates the Camp from the 11 Park. 12 Q: Fair enough. Okay. Thank you. And 13 when you saw this did you -- did you go to render 14 assistance to Officer Jacklin? 15 A: Well, we went up there and some other 16 uniformed officers came down, as well. Obviously he, 17 obviously, radioed in. And so some other -- the uniform 18 Officers came down; Stan Koresec being opportunity 19 exports, Neil Whelan being another. I can't remember all 20 of the Officers that were there. 21 Q: All right. And then what transpired 22 next once the other Officers arrived? 23 A: It was settled down. Stan Korosec 24 said, you know, No action right now, let's settle it down 25 and the Officers ended up leaving. The First Nations


1 people went back to the Camp. Still lots of yelling and 2 screaming across -- the campers were yelling screaming, 3 as well as the First Nations people back and forth -- 4 Q: Okay. 5 A: -- at each other. 6 Q: Okay. So you had campers, you had 7 First Nations people and you had police officers all 8 involved? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And as you were standing there 11 observing this, did you feel that there were reasonable 12 grounds for you to make any arrests? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And on what basis? 15 A: Oh, the mischief to the cruiser, you 16 know, the impaired driving by the driver; he had 17 obviously been drinking because you could smell it. 18 Q: You could smell it? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: You were that close? 21 A: Absolutely. 22 Q: How close were you to him? 23 A: Oh, 3 or 4 feet at one (1) time. 24 Q: Okay. 25 A: That would be Judas -- Judas George.


1 Q: How do you know that was his name? 2 A: I got identification later. They 3 told me that's who it was. 4 Q: And to your knowledge were any 5 charges ultimately laid? 6 A: Stewart got -- I charged Stewart with 7 the mischief to the cruiser later. 8 Q: All right. 9 A: Stan Korosec didn't want to do any 10 enforcement at that time, so we -- the confrontation was 11 settled down and the uniformed police left. 12 Q: What was your view with respect to 13 Sergeant Korosec's decision to not enforce as you put it? 14 A: Well, that was his decision. I don't 15 know what instructions he had from anybody else but -- so 16 -- we had to live with that. 17 Q: Well, and you advised us earlier that 18 you had had a telephone conversation with Inspector 19 Carson, the Incident Commander that -- that day, right? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And didn't he tell you that you were 22 to essentially enforce the law on Matheson Drive? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And so how did you reconcile that? 25 A: It was -- Stan was in charge so it


1 was Stan's decision. 2 Q: All right. Did you speak to him 3 about that? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And what was the -- the discussion 6 you had with Stan Korosec? 7 A: Just basically I -- I thought that we 8 could have arrested a few people and maybe September 4th 9 wouldn't have happened, but he -- he felt otherwise so -- 10 Q: All right. 11 A: -- I live with that. 12 Q: And did you raise this action with -- 13 with the Incident Commander at all? 14 A: No, no. 15 Q: Why not? 16 A: It was just between Stan and I. 17 Q: Okay. And did you have any 18 conversations with either Officer Jacklin or Officer 19 Whelan after this event? 20 A: Immediately after Neil Whelan told me 21 there was a -- what he observed as the butt of a gun in 22 the trunk of a vehicle that was parked on the Camp side. 23 Q: And how long after the incident did 24 he tell you that? 25 A: Just several minutes after.


1 Q: And was that -- what did you take 2 from that comment? 3 A: Well, he -- he said that he wasn't 4 going to, you know, pull his gun or anything because that 5 would obviously have made it a lot worse than it was, but 6 he said he kept observation and made sure that nothing 7 happened and that the trunk eventually was closed and he 8 left it at that. 9 Q: Now, was this a significant piece of 10 information to you in terms of your role as the primary 11 criminal investigator? 12 A: Yes, it was. 13 Q: And is it the type of thing that you 14 would normally put into your notes? 15 A: Put into my notes? 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Would you got to your -- your 16:00 19 hour entry, page 10, and it carries on through 11 and 12, 20 and just take a few moments to review that and -- and 21 advise whether or not you put this entry into your notes? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: No, I didn't.


1 Q: And do you know -- do you know why 2 you didn't put it in there? 3 A: Just probably -- just an error on my 4 part. 5 Q: All right. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Now, did you report this piece of 10 information to Sergeant Korosec? 11 A: Yes, and so did Neil Whelan. 12 Q: All right. And if you go to -- to 13 page - - or sorry, Tab 6 for a moment. This is Exhibit 14 P-426. These are the scribe notes for September the 4th, 15 1995, and I would ask you to please go to the 21:33 entry 16 on page 2. 17 And it appears that the entry is as 18 follows: 19 "Mark Wright advised Trevor Richardson 20 of action to-date. Trevor Richardson 21 advised Natives he dealt with were 22 drunk at 16:00 hours. Green Ford 23 Mercury, grey on trunk [sorry, is that 24 grey?] grey on trunk, had butt of rifle 25 in trunk. Advised to put it back


1 without incident. We have to find the 2 spokesperson -- who the spokesperson 3 is. Trevor Richardson advised John 4 Carson and Mark Wright of earlier 5 damage to cruiser." 6 Now, do you recall having a conversation 7 with -- with Mark Wright in relation to this event? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And do you recall whether this is an 10 accurate reflection of that conversation? 11 A: It appears to be. 12 Q: Did you also speak to John Carson 13 with respect to this incident, do you recall? 14 A: I don't know if I spoke directly to 15 John Carson or not. 16 Q: All right. Fair enough. And were 17 you advised as the criminal investigator to pursue any 18 investigation with respect to this sighting of -- of a -- 19 of a butt in the trunk of a car? 20 A: Well, I would have except I don't 21 know if anybody could identify who had the gun or -- and 22 where the vehicle went. 23 Q: All right. So you weren't advised to 24 direct, to -- to conduct an investigation? 25 A: Was I told to do, no.


1 Q: Yeah, all right. And the reason why 2 you didn't initiate one? 3 A: Well, I mean we'd have to go across 4 to the Camp over there and it would just start the conf - 5 - the confrontation up again. So nothing happened. 6 And it's not illegal to have a gun in your 7 trunk and so we'd have to go for another -- the butt of a 8 gun; we don't know if there was a barrel on it or it was 9 just a butt by itself. 10 I mean, there's lots of what if's. 11 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And did you -- 12 were you given any direction or understanding with 13 respect to your authority to go onto the Army Camp Base 14 at this time, to pursue any type of criminal 15 investigation? 16 A: I was under the understanding that we 17 would not. 18 Q: All right. And were you provided 19 with a rationale for that? 20 A: No, I don't think so. 21 Q: And did you pass along any of this 22 information to -- to Officer Bell, Whitehead or Dyke? 23 A: At this time? 24 Q: Yes. 25 A: No.


1 Q: All right. Did you later? 2 A: Yes, I believe I did. 3 Q: All right. And what would be the 4 purpose of providing that type of information to -- to 5 that unit? 6 A: So they could keep a record of 7 incidences involving rifles and stuff like that that was 8 happening -- occurring, as well as any other criminal 9 incident. 10 Q: Fair enough. Now, did you write any 11 type of incident report or -- or make any written report 12 with respect to this sighting or information? 13 A: I don't know. I think Neil Whelan 14 might have, but I personally did not. 15 Q: All right. And do you recall what 16 you did then for the remainder of that afternoon up to 17 18:00 hours? 18 A: Just watched both campers and First 19 Nations people, and saw the one (1) vehicle there broke 20 off a no parking sign. Then I was advised that the -- 21 that there's two (2) gates up at Army Camp Road and 22 Matheson Drive, they were locked and blocked so nobody 23 could go up or down Matheson Drive. 24 I spoke with Stan Korosec again and he had 25 been in touch with Inspector Carson, and Inspector Carson


1 said don't worry about the locked gates. 2 Q: And what was -- did you have a 3 concern with respect to the fact that the gates had been 4 locked? 5 A: Well, it just certainly prevents our 6 vehicles from going down there if needed. You'd have to 7 go either through the Park or you'd have to walk or -- 8 so. 9 Q: All right. And just for the record, 10 you're -- you're now looking at your 18:00 and 18:55 -- 11 or sorry, 18:15 -- 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: -- time entries? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Okay. Carry on. 16 A: And then at 18:55 I spoke with Stan 17 Korosec again. He advised that the Park was now empty of 18 all the campers and it was, I guess, officially closed 19 for the season, and that they were going to stay a little 20 while and then they were going to come back and do some 21 patrols in the morning. 22 Q: Okay. And your understanding when 23 you left the Park was that there would be further 24 continuing patrol for awhile? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: That all the visitors -- was it your 2 understanding that all the visitors and campers had 3 vacated the Park? 4 A: That was my understanding, yes. 5 Q: And so then you -- you left the Park 6 and were en route to Kent Detachment? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And that was at about 19:30? 9 A: Yes, it was. 10 Q: All right. Now, when did you find 11 out that the Park had, in fact, become occupied? 12 A: About forty (40) minutes later at 13 about 20:10 or 8:10. 14 Q: And that's at page 13 of your notes? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Okay. And what -- first of all, who 17 told you? 18 A: I -- I don't know. 19 Q: All right. And were you given any 20 details with respect to the -- the specifics of the 21 occupation? 22 A: I was just told that the First 23 Nations people had taken over the Park and I was supposed 24 to turn around and come back to Forrest. 25 Q: All right. And did you?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And what -- you arrived at about 3 21:30? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Or thereabouts. And you had a 6 meeting then with the Incident Commander Inspector Carson 7 and Detective Sergeant Wright? 8 A: Yes, I did. 9 Q: And who else was involved in that 10 briefing; do you recall? 11 A: I don't recall anybody else at that 12 time. 13 Q: All right. And what were you told by 14 these individuals? 15 A: That the First Nations people took 16 over the -- the Park around 7:30 or 19:30 hours. They 17 were trying -- tried to hold the maintenance building but 18 weren't able to and they pulled back out of the Park. 19 And that George Speck and the MNR, Les 20 Kobayashi, were down at the Park now and were trying to 21 talk to some of the leaders down there of the First 22 Nations people. 23 Q: Were you given any other details with 24 respect to the occupation or the manner in which it 25 occurred?


1 A: I was told later by George Speck -- 2 Q: All right. 3 A: -- at 21:48 when he came back, they 4 said that they weren't allowed to -- or they couldn't get 5 a hold of anybody to tell them to leave the property. 6 But initially they said that a firecracker 7 was thrown at one (1) of the Officers, and that Judas 8 George came up and smashed out one (1) of the cruiser 9 windows. 10 Q: All right. And did -- first of all, 11 let me ask you this: How did the -- how did your role 12 change or evolve as a result of the fact that the 13 occupation has now occurred? 14 A: Hadn't changed. 15 Q: Didn't change at all? 16 A: No. 17 Q: And were you given any direction by 18 Inspector Carson or Staff Sergeant Mark Wright with 19 respect to any particular criminal investigations they 20 wished you to pursue? 21 A: No, they -- they just left me to 22 investigate what I believed was criminal incidents. 23 Q: And at this time, based on the 24 information from those individuals as a subsequent 25 information from Officer Speck --


1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: -- did you make any determination as 3 to any necessity of a criminal investigation? 4 A: Yes, obviously, Judas -- I was going 5 to charge him with mischief for smashing out the cruiser 6 windows. And the firecrackers thrown at an officer, it 7 turned out it was a flare, once I talked to the officer. 8 And so a charge was laid there against 9 David Abraham George. 10 Q: All right. And what did you do to 11 pursue those investig -- the investigations with respect 12 to those individuals? 13 A: I took statements from the Officers, 14 took photos of the damage, and then eventually I went to 15 the Court with information and swore the warrants to 16 arrest for them, that we could execute later when things 17 calmed down a little bit later. 18 Q: And did you pass on any of these -- 19 this information to the Intelligence Unit? 20 A: The next day. 21 Q: All right. 22 A: On the 5th. 23 Q: And what was the purpose of advising 24 them? 25 A: Don Bell and Jimmy Dyke showed up at


1 our thing there and I filled them in on -- or briefed 2 them on everything that had happened so far. 3 Q: Okay. Were you aware that they were 4 compiling a profile -- profiles of the -- the occupiers? 5 A: That's part of their duty so I 6 assumed that they were, yes. 7 Q: All right. But you weren't 8 specifically made privy to that? 9 A: No. 10 Q: All right. Now, would you go next to 11 the 22:00 entry, page 14, this is still September the 12 4th? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: It says: 15 "Given operational plans for Project 16 Maple." 17 A: Book five (5). 18 Q: Sorry? 19 A: Book five (5). 20 Q: Book five? 21 A: Hmm hmm. 22 Q: Right. Thank you. Book five (5), 23 what does book five mean? 24 A: Well, when they were -- they have an 25 operational plan for any major incidents like that they


1 number the books and they record who gets what books. 2 That was mine. 3 Q: And did you, first of all, let's go 4 to Tab 5 of your brief. This is a copy of Exhibit P-424, 5 it's a copy of the plan entitled, Project Maple, 6 September 1995. And just take a few moments to look at 7 this, but is this the operational plan that you were 8 given at 22:00 hours on September the 4th? 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 A: It looks similar. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: There was some stuff on -- there it 15 is there, okay, on the arrests and the different charges 16 that were there, yes. 17 Q: And was this the first time that you 18 had been provided or had seen a copy of the written 19 format of Project Maple? 20 A: Yes. The completed version? 21 Q: Yes. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Had you seen an earlier version? 24 A: Only what I was doing. 25 Q: Okay.


1 A: See, some of this is mine. 2 Q: Okay. All right. 3 A: Okay. So. 4 Q: And when you got this plan did you 5 take the time to read it cover to cover carefully? 6 A: I would say, no, not cover to cover. 7 Q: Did you -- 8 A: Skim -- skimmed through it. 9 Q: You skimmed through it? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Did you -- did you pause at any of 12 the sections that you can recall now and to read those 13 more carefully? 14 A: Well, I -- I would be double-checking 15 what I had completed to make sure that it was done 16 properly -- 17 Q: Perhaps -- 18 A: -- for sure. 19 Q: Perhaps you can show us what portions 20 of the plan you completed or prepared? If you can 21 recall. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: The section there with all the


1 charges, the First Nation, assault police, resist arrest, 2 court order. 3 Q: And this is towards the -- the back? 4 A: The back, yes. 5 Q: Do you see what page number you're 6 looking at, at the very top corner of the -- 7 A: There's -- it's not -- it's not -- it 8 didn't photocopy very well. 9 Q: Fair enough. I agree. 10 A: And then there's a chart. I believe 11 it's page 32. 12 Q: Okay. First of all, I'd just like to 13 see what pages you were referring to so that I can 14 identify them for the record with respect to the criminal 15 charges? 16 A: The... 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: Okay. 21 A: The section right after the maps, I 22 guess, for a better -- 23 Q: You're looking -- 24 A: -- reference point. 25 Q: Are you looking at the document


1 entitled, Operational Plan Primary Investigator, File 2 Coordinator? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And that's a two-page document. It 5 says "prepared by Detective Sergeant Richardson"? 6 A: And Parent, yes. 7 Q: And Parent, okay. 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: And then behind that the arrest 10 report; did you prepare that? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And behind that is the Preliminary 13 Logistical Requirements and Detention and Release Centre; 14 is that yours? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And then next is a chart, "Action 17 Reaction and Possible Charges"? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And that's yours? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: And then following that is the 22 Trespass to Property Act and Breach to Peace, Disobey 23 Court Order, obstruct Peace Officer, resist Peace 24 Officer, assault Peace Officer, impersonation -- 25 A: I think that's about it for --


1 Q: And that's it. So that segment of 2 the package is something that you prepared? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And so you when you looked at this 5 plan you -- you went and paid particular attention to 6 that section to ensure that that was accurate? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Now, I note that under the term 9 "intelligence officer" under the "Operational Plan" -- 10 A: Hmm hmm. 11 Q: -- primary investigator it reads: 12 "Detective Sergeant Don Bell has been 13 identified for this position and will 14 report daily to the primary 15 investigator. He will attempt to 16 identify the demographics of CFB 17 Ipperwash and assist to gather 18 information on the identities of 19 persons unknown to local members." 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And that's something you prepared? 22 A: Myself and Randy Parent, yes. 23 Q: So at this stage you had an 24 understanding that Detective Bell was to report to you? 25 A: Yes, initially. But I mean, I wasn't


1 always there and so he'd also report to Mark Wright or 2 Johnnie Carson as well. 3 Q: And was he to report to you with 4 respect to all of his intelligence work? 5 A: Just for Ipperwash. 6 Q: I'm sorry. Poorly -- poorly worded. 7 All of his intelligence work in relation to Ipperwash? 8 A: If I was there, yes. 9 Q: All right. And not just what you've 10 identified here as being his role? 11 A: I -- sorry? 12 Q: You've identified here a particular 13 role that's been ascribed to Detective Sergeant Bell to 14 attempt to identify the demographics of the Army Camp 15 Base and -- 16 A: Yes, and identify people on the -- on 17 the Camp or in the Park or any strangers coming in, 18 whatever, yes. 19 Q: All right. And he was clearly to 20 report to you on that on a daily basis if you were there? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And was he to report to you with 23 respect to any other aspect of his function? 24 A: Yes, but only as far as -- as I 25 understood it anyway as far as the criminal


1 investigations go. Okay? 2 Q: So insofar as it would be relevant to 3 assisting you in your job of investigating particular 4 alleged criminal activities? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Not with respect to any other 7 function that he may have with respect to the overall 8 operation? 9 A: I don't think I was privy to all that 10 stuff, no. 11 Q: Okay. Fair enough. That was your 12 understanding at least? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And what was the purpose of him 15 reporting to you with respect to information relevant or 16 that might be relevant to your criminal investigation? 17 A: Well, if he had a -- an informant, 18 you know, and -- and says, you know, well the store 19 burned that night, you know, who burned the store or 20 whatever, somewhere that it could lead us to -- to 21 locating a suspect or an accused for an incident, 22 whatever. 23 Q: Fair enough. And was it your job to 24 -- to check the reliability or conduct any reliability 25 assessment of any information that he passed on to you?


1 A: No, I assume that he would pass that 2 out, but on the same token I would still do interviews 3 and, you know, you double-check stuff as well. 4 Q: And was it your understanding that 5 you would in turn pass information provided by him up the 6 chain of command if you will to Wright or Carson or -- 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: -- Inspector Linton? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And were you to exercise any judgment 11 or discretion with respect to what information you would 12 pass along to the -- the Incident Command? 13 A: No, I -- I passed on everything and 14 let them disseminate what they thought was important and 15 what they thought was not important. 16 Q: All right. Fair enough. And still 17 looking at the Project Maple plan if you would kindly go 18 to the -- the fourth page in from the document, it's 19 called -- it's a chart entitled, Coordinated Investigated 20 -- Investigation Teams, CIT, Organizational Chart. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: Do you have that? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And was this brought to your 25 attention when you reviewed the document?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: All right. And you see the box that 3 says, Intelligence Detective Sergeant D. Bell? 4 A: Yeah. As you can tell that looks 5 like it was added later so -- 6 Q: Well. 7 A: -- I mean, it's different printing 8 and everything so... 9 Q: I appreciate that. 10 A: Okay. 11 Q: Do you recall whether that box was 12 there when you -- when you looked at the report? 13 A: I was going to say no, I don't think 14 so, not initially. I think it happened after. 15 Q: After what? 16 A: September 5th probably when Don Bell 17 came up to be involved in Ipperwash. 18 Q: Okay. Prior to the 6th did you see 19 this form of the chart? 20 A: Prior to the 6th? 21 Q: Yes, or prior to the 7th? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Yes, all right. And what did you 24 take from the location of the box in relation to -- to 25 you and the scene investigator?


1 A: I would take nothing from that quite 2 honestly. I wouldn't expect Don Bell to be under my 3 supervision. Don Bell knows intelligence, he would do 4 his own. We'd be equals. 5 Q: Equals? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: All right. So you were in a 8 reporting relationship but you considered it to be on the 9 same par? 10 A: Absolutely. 11 Q: And so where if anywhere would you 12 have put this box? 13 A: Beside me. 14 Q: Beside you? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: A line drawn -- 17 A: Reporting to Mark Wright, you know, 18 where... 19 Q: Let me see if I have an extra copy of 20 this. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: I'm going to provide you with a copy 25 of the chart and I'm going to ask you to draw the box and


1 the line where you think -- which you think is more 2 reflective of the actual relationship. 3 A: Sure. 4 Q: Okay. Just give me a second and 5 we'll get that for you. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Oh, good, that's unmarked? 10 THE REGISTRAR: Yes. 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you very much. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 14 Q: There you are. 15 A: Thank you. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: All right. And perhaps you can just 20 describe it for the record? 21 A: Placed right beside my name on the 22 left-hand side near the edge of the page. 23 Q: And where the -- did you draw a line 24 attached to anything? 25 A: Well, he would -- with that box being


1 there, he would report to Mark Wright would be it -- him 2 and I would be equals on reporting and we'd go to Mark 3 Wright. 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: All right. Let's make 5 that the next exhibit, please? 6 THE REGISTRAR: P-1673, Your Honour. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1673: Coordinated Investigation 9 Team (CIT) Organizational 10 Chart (Project Maple) marked 11 by Witness Mr. Trevor 12 Richardson, June 08, 2006. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 15 Q: And I wonder if you could go to page 16 8 of the Project Maple plan? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: And to the page that is entitled, 21 Intelligence Function, at the top? And did you have 22 particular note or do you recall specifically reviewing 23 this page? 24 A: I'm sure I skimmed through it but I 25 don't know if I can actually say I sat down and read word


1 for word but... 2 Q: As you look at it now, today, does 3 that accurately reflect your understanding of the 4 intelligence function of Detective Sergeant Bell? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Were you aware specifically of any 7 system or product -- protocol that was in place with 8 respect to the -- the processing of intelligence at 9 Project Maple? 10 A: The gathering or the processing? 11 Q: The whole process from gathering -- 12 A: Well -- 13 Q: -- to analysis? 14 A: Initially the -- the uniform officers 15 certainly were supposed to come back and have a written 16 document, as I understood, that they would give to their 17 team leader or Sergeant in charge of anything that 18 happened. And then that would be placed in a box and I - 19 - and it would be reviewed by myself or Don Bell or 20 whatever, depending what function it was. 21 And that's the way it was supposed to 22 happen. But some things, obviously, occur very quickly 23 and some things are just done by word of mouth and I know 24 that having reviewed all the material that I've been 25 involved in, certainly when I'm giving briefings to


1 Inspector Carson or Mark Wright it was my fault that I 2 should have put down that -- because it looks like it's 3 me giving it when it's really not. 4 I should have said, okay, Inspector Paul 5 Smith told me that he saw, whatever. 6 Q: Okay. 7 A: And it would be me saying it for Paul 8 Smith. But it looks like I know in the -- in the Command 9 Post it looks like I did it when I actually didn't. 10 Q: Right. You're passing on information 11 from others? 12 A: I'm passing on information and I 13 should have said, this is from, you know, John Smith, or, 14 you know, whoever. I should -- 15 Q: Do you think there was any confusion 16 that resulted from that? 17 A: Well, initially no. I think 18 everybody understood that. But certainly when you look 19 at it almost eleven (11) years later I can see where 20 people would be confused and -- 21 Q: All right. 22 A: -- and thought that most people were 23 all over the place and wonder how they go there but. 24 Q: Fair enough. We'll -- we'll perhaps 25 go to those documents in a little bit.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: Now, did you understand or did you 3 assume that -- that Detective Sergeant Bell and his team 4 were discharging the usual functions of a formal 5 intelligence unit? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: But that one (1) of their 8 responsibilities or tasks was to assist you where 9 appropriate with your criminal investigations? 10 A: Yes. If we needed them. Yes. 11 Q: If you needed them? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: And would you actually make the 14 request? Would you tell him when you needed their help? 15 A: Yeah, I would -- yeah, we saw each 16 other all the time so if I said, Geez, I haven't got 17 anybody available could somebody go out and interview 18 this person and he says, Yeah, absolutely. 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: I mean, you help each other, right? 21 Q: All right. Now, returning to 22 September 4th, 1995 in your notes at Tab 3. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And page 15. 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And specifically the 22:25 entry 2 indicates there was information received from Constable 3 Mark Zacher? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Could you tell us what information 6 you received? 7 A: He advised me that: 8 "Around 20:00 hours or eight o'clock 9 the Natives cut through the fence on 10 Matheson Drive. About 9:15 or 21:15 11 hours Natives blocked Main Road of Park 12 at the Kiosk Building. About fifty 13 (50) people in the Park. Approximately 14 fifteen (15) females, thirty-five (35) 15 males. No children observed. Ten (10) 16 members had new hunting camouflage on 17 and they had some fire -- fireworks 18 with them. [and] Everybody was calm 19 until Judas showed up." 20 Q: All right. And did you get any more 21 information about that? 22 A: That's -- I wrote down what he told 23 me. 24 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And what, if 25 anything, did you do with that information?


1 A: I would have passed it on. 2 Q: Passed it on to whom? 3 A: Either Mark Wright or Inspector 4 Carson. 5 Q: All right. And when you're passing 6 along information like this are you passing along any -- 7 any analysis or reliability assessment, or are you just 8 passing it on as get it? 9 A: That's -- that's not my function to 10 analyse it. I just pass it on and everybody put the 11 weight into it as they wish. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: I mean, it would be no -- I don't 14 know why you would second guess Mark Zacher if he -- this 15 is what he's observed so. 16 Q: My question was more designed to 17 understand what you would do when you passed on 18 information, if you're just passing it on as it is? 19 A: Yes, it is. 20 Q: All right. And did you have a 21 further discussion with respect to Inspector Carson with 22 respect to checkpoints? 23 A: Earlier. 24 Q: And what -- all right and what was -- 25 A: 10:17 hours.


1 Q: And what was that about? 2 A: Well, he -- he wanted to discuss the 3 checkpoints, roadblocks, whatever you want to call them, 4 and where they should be set up. And he wanted one set 5 up at Army Camp Road and 21 Highway, and one at the Army 6 Camp Road and Lakeshore Road, which is down by the Park 7 so. 8 Q: And what did you understand the 9 function of those checkpoints to be? 10 A: To advise people that -- well, in 11 this case, now that the Park had been taken over, to 12 advise people that came down there that the Park has been 13 taken over, it's not -- you know, you take your own risk 14 if you want to go in the Park or on the sand lot or down 15 to the beach. 16 And to make sure, you know, who was there 17 and if they were cottagers or people that were living in 18 the trailers there across the road, if they were locals 19 or out-of-towners and... 20 Q: And was there an information 21 collecting component that was relevant to your job? 22 A: Not necessarily, no. 23 Q: All right. Did you play any role in 24 briefing any of the checkpoint officers? 25 A: I did for any incidents that


1 occurred. I did that a couple of times at briefings. 2 But not -- not all the time because I wasn't always 3 there. 4 Q: All right. And what would the nature 5 of your briefings be? 6 A: Just to update them on what -- what 7 was happening as far as criminal investigations and -- 8 and outstanding warrants for anybody. You know, if they 9 were in Forrest and there was a warrant for somebody and 10 they happen to see him at Tim Horton's or whatever, you 11 know, they would know that there's a warrant for him. 12 They could arrest him. 13 Q: Fair enough. And if you go to the 14 1:10 a.m. entry on page 16? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Reference to Constable Vince George 17 and Les Kobayashi; what -- what did you learn at that 18 time? 19 A: They had gone down there to serve 20 Bert Manning with a, you're trespassing notice, and I 21 guess he refused service. 22 Q: And did you take any action as a 23 result of that information in terms of criminal 24 investigation? 25 A: No.


1 Q: Now, as at this time, this is about 2 1:00 in the morning, I guess, on -- on the 6th now, what 3 -- what alleged criminal activities were you 4 investigating specifically? 5 A: This is on the 5th now. 6 Q: Oh, I'm sorry, on the 5th. Quite 7 right. 8 A: At that point we had Stewart George 9 for mischief to the cruiser down on Matheson Drive. We 10 had Judas George for smashing out the window during the 11 Park, taking over the Park. We had David Abraham for 12 throwing a flare at Constable Parks and we were 13 contemplating the unlawful entry into the Park which was 14 a section I was not familiar with at all and Section 72 15 of the Criminal Code. 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: And we were trying to get a ruling on 18 that. 19 Q: When you say, "get a ruling on that," 20 what do you mean? 21 A: With the Crown Attorney or the Legal 22 Branch in -- 23 Q: Okay. 24 A: -- Orillia to see if it applied or 25 not.


1 Q: Okay. And what was the concern about 2 it -- whether or not it applied? 3 A: Well, with any criminal charge you 4 don't what to lay it if it doesn't apply so... 5 Q: I appreciate that. What led to your 6 uncertainty as whether or not it would apply here? 7 A: I think just the wording of it. I 8 mean sometimes the wording of some of the Criminal Code 9 charges are very ambiguous and you'd have to kind of get 10 a ruling and see if there's any case law that applies to 11 you or doesn't apply or and so the Crown Attorney and the 12 Legal Branch would know that. 13 Q: And were you aware of the concept of 14 -- of colour of right? 15 A: For property? 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: All right. And was that a 19 consideration -- 20 A: Hmm hmm. 21 Q: -- in this case for you? 22 A: Well, to me the colour of right at 23 that time was for the MNR who were running the -- the 24 Park. 25 Q: All right. All right. And so up


1 until this point in time then essentially are you 2 concentrating your efforts on pursuing investigations in 3 relation to those particular alleged criminal activities? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: All right. And when do you go off 6 duty on this shift? 7 A: 3:00 in the morning. 8 Q: All right. And who relieved you if 9 anyone while you were off duty? 10 A: Mark Dew. 11 Q: And was he -- did he become your 12 second in command; is that...? 13 A: He just worked the night shift. 14 Q: Oh, he just worked the night shift? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: Okay. But did he have your authority 17 if you will? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. Moving then to September the 20 5th in the morning did you return to duty at 7:00 in the 21 morning? 22 A: I did. 23 Q: And that's at page 17 of your notes? 24 A: Yes, it is. 25 Q: And so you had something less than


1 four (4) hours of sleep? 2 A: Approximately. 3 Q: Were you briefed by Detective 4 Constable Dew? 5 A: Yes, I was. 6 Q: And did anything of significance 7 occur while you were off duty? 8 A: Just some floodlights were shone at 9 the uniformed members that were on the checkpoints; 10 nothing major happened. 11 Q: All right. Anything worthy of 12 pursuing further criminal investigation? 13 A: No. 14 Q: And if we would go to the entry at 15 7:16 a.m.? You had a meeting with Sergeant Korosec, 16 Inspector Carson and Detective Sergeant Wright? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Can you tell me what the purpose of 19 that meeting was? 20 A: I think it -- as I recall it was to 21 replace the ERT team that were on the checkpoints because 22 they -- Stan Korosec's team had been busy all weekend 23 basically and so they needed some sleep and so we got 24 some other ERT teams in to take over the checkpoints. 25 Q: All right. So you were replacing...


1 A: Districts 1 and 2 ERT teams with 3 2 and 6. 3 Q: 3 and 6. All right. And -- and why 4 was that -- is that something -- part of your 5 responsibility? 6 A: No, they just discussed it with me 7 that's all. 8 Q: What would be the purpose of that? 9 A: Just to let me know what's going on I 10 guess. 11 Q: Okay. Did you learn anything else of 12 significance from them? 13 A: No. 14 Q: All right. And if you go to the 7:30 15 a.m. entry it indicates that you contacted Intelligence 16 Officers Don Bell and Jim Dyke? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And did you have a meeting with them? 19 A: Later on that day, yes, 8:30. 20 Q: All right. And you met -- it says 21 according to the note that you met with Don Bell? 22 A: Yes, and I think 8:50 Jim Dyke showed 23 up and I briefed him as well. 24 Q: Okay. Can you tell us what you 25 briefed Don Bell about?


1 A: I would have told him the sequence of 2 events that have happened up to -- so far, up to that 3 date. 4 Q: All right. 5 A: Taking over the Park, the charges 6 that have been contemplated, you know, right up to the 7 floodlights on the guys last night, the night before. 8 Q: And did you ask him to assist you 9 with respect to any of those particular criminal 10 investigations? 11 A: No, not those criminal 12 investigations, no. 13 Q: Did you ask for his assistance with 14 respect to any other aspect of your role? 15 A: Just to see if they could -- see if 16 they could find out who was down there in the Park, 17 because we were still contemplating that Section 72 of 18 the Criminal Code there for unlawful entry into the Park. 19 Q: Hmm hmm. 20 A: So we needed to identify some of the 21 people that were down there. 22 Q: So you asked -- 23 A: Myself, I mean I only knew a few, 24 only as they were identified to me as a result of the -- 25 the 4th, so.


1 Q: All right. So you asked him to -- if 2 his Unit would assist in identification of the occupiers? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And also with respect to providing 5 any background with respect to the occupiers? 6 A: Yes, that would be implied. 7 Q: All right. And -- 8 A: And if they had anything on them, as 9 well, through their intelligence gathering over the last 10 few years or whatever. 11 Q: Did you discuss any other roles or at 12 least tasks that he was going to be discharging? 13 A: Other than being the intelligence 14 officer and gathering what information he could, I 15 believe that was all, that I'm aware of. 16 Q: Did you go into detail with respect 17 to his, what he'd be doing in discharge of the 18 intelligence function? 19 A: No, he would know that. 20 Q: All right. And you had the same 21 briefing with Jim Dyke? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And did you eventually provide that 24 information to Daryl Whitehead? 25 A: Yes, I can't remember when I met with


1 Daryl. I think he took Don's spot but it was sometime 2 later, I believe. 3 Q: Okay. Now, at 9:20 you receive 4 advice from Constable Parks? 5 A: Yes. That's the misunderstanding 6 about the firecracker and a flare. 7 Q: All right. 8 A: I spoke with Larry Parks and he 9 advised it was definitely a flare. 10 Q: And so at this point does it then 11 become the subject of a criminal investigation by you? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: All right. And at -- if you go to 14 page 19 and the 9:25 a.m. briefing. 15 A: Yes -- 16 Q: It looks like there was a meeting 17 with the Unit Commanders. And can you recall what you 18 learned of significance to you with respect to that 19 briefing? 20 A: Well, I advised them about the 21 charges being laid and contacting the Crown Attorney, and 22 that the Intelligence Unit has arrived and they will be 23 doing their thing. Inspector Carson advised that Chief 24 Bressette was advised and agreed with us. 25 Town of Bosanquet was getting an


1 injunction for Matheson Drive. MNR going for an 2 injunction. Member of Parliament was notified. 3 Apparently the Premier of Ontario was notified. 4 If no one is in the Park we'll try and get 5 control of it, but if there's someone in the Park we'll 6 stay out of it. 7 And they were going to get the OPP boat to 8 go into the water and see what they could see from the 9 water area. 10 Q: All right. Do you recall whether or 11 not, Don Bell was at this meeting? 12 A: I don't know, you'd probably have to 13 look up the Unit Commander's meeting minutes, I don't 14 know. 15 Q: I appreciate that. There's a -- he's 16 certainly listed in the scribe notes, but he didn't have 17 a recollection of being there so I was wondering whether 18 you could help us out? 19 A: He may have already left with Jimmy 20 Dyke to go do their thing. 21 Q: All right. 22 A: I don't know. 23 Q: Do you have any independent 24 recollection of this meeting other than what is in your 25 notes?


1 A: After eleven (11) years I don't think 2 I can, no. 3 Q: Okay. Now, if you go to the 10:45 4 a.m. entry then, and this is a meeting -- or it appears 5 that you had a meeting with Constable Dyke and Sergeant 6 Bell; is that correct? 7 A: Yes, it is. 8 Q: And did you learn anything from them? 9 A: Yeah, they were allowed -- they were 10 allowed to walk around the Park, I guess, and they 11 observed seven (7) First Nations, three (3) males, two 12 (2) women and two (2) children. They observed some 13 vehicles that I wrote down what they were. There were 14 some males cutting down some trees by the main gate. 15 Some people congregating around the washrooms. 16 And I'm not sure what that last -- last 17 entry is. Oh: 18 "Baton press by beach off Park." 19 Must be a press -- 20 Q: Media? 21 A: Media. 22 Q: Media. Okay. And did you brief them 23 about anything? 24 A: I probably would have told them about 25 the meeting at 9:25.


1 Q: And was this information helpful to 2 you, or at least provided to you with respect to your -- 3 the criminal investigation side of this operation? 4 A: Well, it certainly helps when you 5 know what vehicles are there, you know, anybody that they 6 can identify. I mean, it -- it all helps. Whether that 7 information is useful later on, I don't know, but. 8 Q: All right. And if you go to the 9 twelve o'clock entry on page 21, it reflects that you had 10 a meeting with Crown attorney Don Vale. 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Do you recall what that was about? 13 A: It was discussing the charges and 14 also discussing a authorization for a wire tap. 15 Q: And with respect to the charges that 16 you discussed, did they include the possible charges with 17 respect to -- to the occupation of the Park? 18 A: Section 72 charges? 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: I believe I discussed that all with 21 him. I'm not sure exactly at what point that everybody 22 decided that that would apply and they were laid. I -- I 23 can't remember right at the moment exactly what date that 24 was. I -- I know if you look at the information -- the 25 court information, certainly it would be the date that I


1 swore to it, so it had to be sometime prior to that. 2 But we also didn't know everybody that was 3 there, so we -- it took us sometime before we could 4 identify everybody that was on the Park. 5 Q: All right. So you were waiting, more 6 or less, to see if you could identify all of the 7 occupiers before you would be in a position, I guess, to 8 prepare an arrest -- 9 A: That specific charge, yes. 10 Q: -- on that charge? And did you 11 receive any advice from Don Veil as to whether or not 12 there were grounds for the charge to be laid, based on 13 what you told him? 14 A: Well, I got in here that he agrees, 15 so he must have agreed with what I told him. 16 Q: All right. And you don't have any -- 17 do you have any recollection as to what you told him? 18 A: I'm sure I just told him basic -- 19 what happened, as I knew it. 20 Q: Okay. Fair enough. Now, did you 21 prepare any arrest packages that day? 22 A: Yes, I did. 23 Q: And do you recall with respect to 24 whom and what they were based on? 25 A: That would have been for Stewart,


1 Judas and David Abraham. 2 Q: Okay. And how long did you work on 3 those? Can you recall how long it took to -- you -- you 4 to prepare those packages that day? 5 A: Oh, I prepared them from the 4th when 6 it happened. 7 Q: Okay. Fair enough. If we go then to 8 19:30 on September 5th, the reference to Inspector 9 Linton. Can you recall, was that the first time that you 10 had met Inspector Linton? 11 A: No, I knew him before. 12 Q: All right. In relation to this 13 operation? 14 A: I probably met with him before that. 15 Q: Do you have any specific recollection 16 as to whether you met with him in relation to Project 17 Maple before this meeting? 18 A: Oh, I know I would have, yes. 19 Q: All right. 20 A: But nothing major that, you know, 21 that I'd write down what I told him or he told me. 22 Q: Who did you under -- what did you 23 understand his role to be? 24 A: He was second in charge, I guess, for 25 when Johnny Carson wasn't there.


1 Q: All right. So the Alternate Incident 2 Commander? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And was it for the night shift? 5 A: Yes, I believe it was. 6 Q: And to your knowledge, was this his 7 first night executing that position? 8 A: Don't recall that. 9 Q: Fair enough. What did you tell him? 10 A: I gave him a brief overview of 11 everything that the Crime Unit had been doing at that 12 time. 13 Q: All right. And just can you tell us 14 what that -- what that was? 15 A: Everything I've already just said 16 about the charges being laid. You know, contemplating a 17 Section 72 charges, you know, everything that I could 18 relay to him that he didn't already know about. 19 Q: Fair enough. Now, I understand that 20 you were off duty at 20:30? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: But that you received information at 23 21:20 that a certain video camera was now operational? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And being monitored by Constable


1 Martin? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And do you recall where that video 4 camera was, what it was monitoring? 5 A: They had three (3) of them, I'm not 6 sure which one was up. There was one (1) in the store, 7 there was one (1) in the kiosk, and there was one (1) in 8 the maintenance shed. 9 Q: Okay. 10 A: I'm not sure which one he was 11 monitoring. I think it was the -- the kiosk and the 12 maintenance shed, but I'm -- I'm not 100 percent on that. 13 Q: All right. Do you recall anything -- 14 all right, that's fine. And did you pass that 15 information along to Inspector Carson? 16 A: Yes, I did. 17 Q: And why would you pass it on to him 18 as opposed to Inspector Linton? 19 A: I just -- I don't know why. 20 Q: Okay. Fair enough. We're ready to 21 move to September the 6th, and perhaps we should have our 22 lunch break at this time. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 24 That's fine. 25 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands


1 adjourned until 1:00 p.m. 2 3 --- Upon recessing at 12:03 p.m. 4 --- Upon resuming at 1:07 p.m. 5 6 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 7 resumed, pease be seated. 8 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Good afternoon. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 10 afternoon. 11 THE WITNESS: Hi. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 14 Q: I wonder if you would go to your 15 notes, Tab 3, page 24. 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And it's Exhibit P-1671. And we're 18 onto September the 6th, 1995 and I understand you arrived 19 at the Forest Detachment at 6:45 a.m. and receive a 20 briefing by Detective Constable Dew. 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: And would you tell us what you 23 learned in the course of that briefing. 24 A: As I explained before, Mark Dew took 25 over the night shift in my absence and he advised that


1 during the evening four (4) cruisers were damaged by 2 rocks, that automatic gunfire was heard back in the Camp, 3 and that some picnic tables had been stacked up at the 4 curve of Army Camp Road and East Parkway Drive by the 5 sandy parking lot. 6 Q: And was there anything of 7 significance with respect to any of these three (3) 8 events, to you in your role as a criminal investigator? 9 A: Yes. The damaged cruisers obviously 10 were mischief and the automatic gunfire obviously is a 11 little more disturbing than just hearing a shotgun or a 12 rifle. 13 I mean, it's a rifle or a shotgun that 14 people have for hunting and, you know, a lot of people 15 have them. But when you hear automatic gunfire, 16 they're prohibited weapons, there's really only one use 17 for those type of weapons and that's to hurt people. 18 Q: And with respect to your role as the 19 criminal investigator, would that be relevant because 20 it's an indicator of the possibility of, as you said, a 21 prohibited weapon, which you give rise to a criminal 22 charge? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: All right. And the issue of the 25 picnic tables stacked at the curve, did that give rise --


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: -- to any concern with respect to a 3 possible criminal investigation? 4 A: Well, certainly mischief to property 5 in that it's preventing people to go on the -- on the 6 public property, which is the sand lot that separates the 7 cottagers from the Park, and blocking that. It would 8 also be possibly a traffic hazard as well. 9 Q: And did you have any information as 10 to the ownership of that sandy parking lot area where 11 these picnic tables were? 12 A: I -- I believed it to be either part 13 of the Park where visitors parked or part of the 14 Municipality of Bosanquet or whatever. 15 Q: Okay. And did you ask Don Bell's 16 team to do anything relative to these events in 17 assistance with your criminal investigation? 18 A: No. 19 Q: All right. And I understand that 20 after the briefing you attended the vicinity of the Park? 21 A: Yes, I did. 22 Q: That was about 7:30 or 7:40 in the 23 morning? 24 A: Yes, with Mark Wright. 25 Q: What was the purpose of your


1 attendance? 2 A: Just to see how many picnic tables 3 were down there, if anybody was manning the picnic 4 tables, what was going on, the -- the -- take a look at 5 the severity of the situation. 6 Q: And what did you observe when you got 7 down there with -- with Mark Wright? 8 A: There was a -- about twelve (12) 9 picnic tables, there was a tent pitched, there was a fire 10 going, and there was a couple of First Nations people 11 there sitting around the -- the fire. 12 Q: All right. And was anything done as 13 a result of these observations? 14 A: Yes. Arrangements were made to have 15 the ERT teams go down there and remove the picnic tables. 16 Q: Do you know who gave that order? 17 A: I believe it was Mark Wright. 18 Q: All right. And did they arrive? 19 A: Who? 20 Q: The ERT team? 21 A: Oh, yes, they did. 22 Q: And did you observe their actions? 23 A: Yes, they -- they went down and 24 loaded up the -- the tables, took two (2) loads. There 25 was actually more than twelve (12) tables, but it took


1 two (2) loads to get the -- the tables out of the -- out 2 of the sand lot. 3 Q: And was there any -- any resistance 4 or any difficulty with the removal of the picnic tables? 5 A: No. The -- by the time they went 6 down there, after some time had passed after Mark Wright 7 and I had driven by there was only a gentleman later 8 identified as Dudley George. He was down there at the 9 picnic tables and he went back in the Park when the guys 10 came down to load up the picnic tables. 11 Q: And how did you come to know that one 12 (1) of the -- that -- that person was Dudley George? 13 A: I was advised that; somebody knew him 14 and they told me. 15 Q: From the -- from -- from where, the 16 ERT teams or...? 17 A: ERT teams or George Speck was one (1) 18 of them, yeah. 19 Q: Okay. It indicates in your notes 20 that there were two (2) native males? 21 A: Initially. 22 Q: Yes. And one (1) was Dudley George, 23 you believe? 24 A: When -- when were there at 7:30 there 25 was two (2) males. When the ERT guys went back there was


1 only one (1) and that was Dudley. 2 Q: Okay. And he went into the Park? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: All right. And did you observe any 5 activity which would have given you reasonable grounds to 6 arrest anyone? 7 A: We could have arrested Dudley, I 8 guess, for mischief, but he -- he went back in the Park 9 and so there was no arrest and no charges as a result of 10 the picnic tables. 11 Q: All right. I understand you then 12 went to the Tactical Operations Centre at about 8:30 in 13 the morning? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And was that the -- the Centre that 16 was located along East Parkway Drive? 17 A: Yes, it was, it was in a -- I guess a 18 parking lot that was used for additional vehicles when 19 the Park was too full. 20 Q: All right. And what was your 21 purpose of attending at the TOC? 22 A: Just what I explained. We had the 23 ERT guys come down there and we told them about the 24 picnic tables and they went and got them. 25 Q: Okay. And when you got to the TOC


1 did you make any observations of relevance? 2 A: No, just that the ERT guys came down 3 and they -- they were told about the tables and they went 4 and got them. 5 Q: Now, did you continue to -- to keep 6 track of the -- the checkpoints at all during the course 7 of the 6th? Was that something that was -- that you paid 8 attention to? 9 A: Only if information came back to 10 Forest Detachment. 11 Q: Okay. And again that would be in the 12 form of a written report that went -- 13 A: Written report, some of it was 14 verbal, there's no doubt about that. 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: And did, essentially, you spend the 18 day preparing and pursuing criminal investigations on the 19 matters that you have now identified? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: Now, from your perspective, were the 22 -- were the checkpoints being used to their maximum 23 advantage at this point? 24 A: They were probably doing the best 25 they could. I believe they could have been a little more


1 diligent in obtaining information or seeing what's coming 2 and going. But, generally speaking, there was -- it was 3 pretty good. 4 Q: All right. And did you update 5 Inspector Carson at 10:00 in the morning? Or perhaps 6 10:15? 7 A: I don't know if Johnny Carson was 8 there or not. 9 Q: Okay. 10 A: I just put down Unit Commander. 11 Q: Fair enough. All right. And do you 12 recall what that meeting was about? 13 A: It was about the picnic tables. It 14 was about the automatic gunfire that we'd heard and that 15 was heard over the night, and the cruisers being damaged. 16 And the rest of the day there, like, I got pictures of 17 the cruisers, the damage to them, and statements from the 18 officers and stuff like that. 19 Q: And did you learn anything of 20 significance with respect to the video camera 21 surveillance that was being monitored? 22 A: That the -- the videos at the 23 gatehouse showed nothing. There was not -- not much 24 activity at the Gatehouse. And inside the maintenance 25 shed there was a few people that were observed.


1 Q: Okay. Do you recall what you did, 2 essentially, between 11:30 and 12:30 p.m.? 3 A: Yes, as I said, I took photos of the 4 damaged cruisers, statements from the officers that were 5 there, spoke with Vince George and he passed on some 6 information to me about the -- the people that were down 7 in the Park and some of the vehicles that he'd seen. 8 Q: And do you recall what information, 9 I'm looking at your note at 11:40, he provided you with 10 respect to Les Jewel, Russ Jewel, Tina George and -- 11 well, and Tina George? 12 A: Yes. 13 "Vince George advised that Les Jewel 14 and Russ Jewel were stirring up 15 everybody." 16 That: 17 "Tina George and Russ Jewel were living 18 in the maintenance shed." 19 And that: 20 "A vehicle from Moraviantown First 21 Nations Territory was down there, owned 22 by Marilyn Tobias and driven by a 23 gentlemen named Chris who they thought 24 could be a guy from Oka." 25 Q: Okay. And why was this -- was this


1 of significance to you, at least this information? 2 A: Well certainly it's not the regular 3 Stoney Pointers or the Kettle Point people that were 4 there. These are -- are from other areas of the Province 5 so. 6 Q: Did you relay this information to Don 7 Bell or anyone on his team? 8 A: I -- I think later on that day I did. 9 Q: All right. And did you have -- did 10 you have a sense as to what Don Bell and his team were 11 primarily engaged in during the course of that day? 12 A: Not until later on. Around three 13 o'clock in the afternoon Don was -- Don Bell was heading 14 to check out the cameras and -- and the checkpoints as 15 well. 16 Q: Okay. Did you assign that task to 17 him? 18 A: That was given to me and I gave it to 19 him, and he said he would do it. 20 Q: Okay. So that came from who? 21 A: Probably either Johnny Carson or Mark 22 Wright or somebody. 23 Q: Okay. All right. I understand there 24 was another meeting of the Unit Commanders at 14:30? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And what was that about? 2 A: About the feasibility of the cameras 3 on -- they were looking for a spot to put some cameras 4 outside the -- the Park where they could do some 5 monitoring just with the cameras, to see the activity 6 there. 7 Q: Okay. 8 A: And they wanted to know the 9 feasibility of having that. And that's what Don Bell 10 said he would go and check that out because he would know 11 better than I would where a camera would be stationed. 12 Q: Right. And there's -- it indicates 13 also: "Need memo re who has been --" 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: "-- identified as being in the Park." 16 What's that -- 17 A: The Unit Commander wanted to know of 18 all the people that we have identified so far as being in 19 the Park for sure, so. 20 Q: All right. And was that provided to 21 the Unit Commander? 22 A: Yes, it was. 23 Q: And who was that provided by? 24 A: Myself. 25 Q: And where did you get that binder


1 from, or that memo from? 2 A: Just from talking to Vince George and 3 the people that we already know that were down there from 4 the 4th and the 5th. 5 Q: Okay. If you go to 17:20 and 17:30, 6 this is pages 28 to 29. And I'll just note for the 7 record that there is personal information at the top of 8 page 29; the name and address should be redacted. 9 And that means that you shouldn't refer to 10 the name or address in the public record. 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: Just say the -- an individual in 13 question. 14 A: Sure. 15 Q: But in any event, so my first 16 question is: What was this situation about? 17 A: Don Bell and I were dispatched down 18 to Point -- Port Franks, which is on the other side of 19 the Camp. Apparently there was a vehicle, with a bunch 20 of First Nations people around it, stuck in the sand 21 outside the Camp. 22 And the person that called it in was a 23 little nervous that they were there and wondered why they 24 were there and stuff. So we went down there to check it 25 out to see if there was any criminal activity or see who


1 it was, if we could and -- just to ease their minds. 2 Q: And when you got there, what did you 3 find? 4 A: There was a beige Camaro parked down 5 with the trunk open. They were loading something in it 6 but by then they'd gone off to the Camp side. And 7 anyways, so they -- they were heading back that way so we 8 -- we didn't have an opportunity to identify anybody or 9 go down there and see what was going on, so. 10 Q: And did you observe anything that you 11 considered to be criminal -- or the nature of criminal 12 activity? 13 A: No, nothing that would -- 14 Q: Did you -- 15 A: -- stir up -- that would stir up an 16 investigation, no. 17 Q: All right. And did you speak to the 18 -- the resident? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And to what effect? 21 A: Just to calm him down a little bit 22 and make sure that, you know, the people weren't getting 23 paranoid or misinformed of what was going on. So we just 24 kind of told them what was going on and he seemed happy 25 when we left.


1 Q: And just in a general way, what did 2 you advise was going on or how did you satisfy their -- 3 their concerns? 4 A: Just that there was a, you know, a 5 dispute over the Park and, you know, it'll probably be 6 settled in court. And we were there to keep the peace 7 and make sure everybody was behaving themselves and -- 8 and there had been no problems up to that point, so. 9 Q: Okay. And -- and that was your view 10 of the situation; there had been no significant problems 11 to that point that should concern the public? 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: All right. And if we go now to the 14 18:30 entry, this is still on page 29. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: You had a conversation, I believe, 17 with a Detective Sergeant Barry McKenzie? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And can you tell us, first of all, 20 who is -- like what was his role in this operation? 21 A: He's a Detective Sergeant, he was 22 from Technical Support Branch at that time. He's in 23 charge of getting authorizations for wiretaps. And so he 24 sits down and he gathers all the information that he can 25 and then he provides it to a judge and it's up to the


1 judge to decide whether we should have one or not, so. 2 Q: And was -- was this type of a Part 6 3 Authorization being considered, in part, to assist you in 4 your criminal investigations? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: All right. And at this point are you 7 at the Forest Detachment? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: I understand that you then received 10 information from Detective Constable Dew at about 20:00 11 hours, and we're over at page 30 of your notes. 12 A: No. I updated him. 13 Q: You updated him. Thank you. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And what did you update him with 16 respect to? 17 A: Well, I was -- I was advised, it had 18 to be one of the Command staff, that there was eight (8) 19 or ten (10) Natives back at the corner of Army Camp and 20 East Parkway with baseball bats. They apparently damaged 21 a vehicle as it drove by. 22 Constable Sam Poole was taking a 23 statement. And -- and eventually he went down there to 24 make sure Sam was okay and what information was -- was 25 gleaned out of the statement by the -- the person for any


1 criminal charges that may apply. 2 Q: All right. And is the reason why -- 3 sorry, where did you get that information? 4 A: It must have been from the Command 5 staff. 6 Q: You don't have any recollection? 7 A: No. 8 Q: All right. And why did you pass this 9 on to Detective Constable Dew? 10 A: Because I wanted him to go down and 11 make sure that Officer Sam Poole got a proper statement, 12 and if he needed a hand because I didn't know where they 13 were. I didn't know if they were on the side of the road 14 or where they were taking the statements, so. 15 Q: And did you ask Detective Constable 16 Dew to conduct any supplementary interview or -- or take 17 any further statement or ensure certain information was 18 covered by a statement? 19 A: Just to make sure that the statement 20 covered what -- what was damaged, how it was damaged, if 21 the victim knew who -- who damaged the vehicle, and so he 22 -- he went down to do that. 23 Q: All right. And did you have any 24 information with respect to who the -- the Complainant 25 was?


1 A: Not at that time, it was later on. 2 Q: All right. And did you take or ask 3 him to take any steps with respect to determining, if you 4 will, or asking questions that would be aimed at 5 determining the -- the voracity of the -- the statement? 6 A: No. 7 Q: All right. Did you pass along this 8 information to anyone else? 9 A: About the damaged vehicle? 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: They told me about it. 12 Q: I appreciate that. Did you convey 13 this to Don Bell, this information? 14 A: I don't know if I did or not. I know 15 we ended up riding together that night, so. 16 Q: Okay. All right. And was it your 17 intention that the -- the statement that was being taken 18 by Constable Sam Poole, that it would come back to the 19 Forest Detachment and be put into the tray? 20 A: And if there was a criminal charge, 21 like if we knew who it was and there was indeed damage 22 and all that stuff, yes, a criminal investigation would 23 be conducted and charges laid as -- as is needed. 24 Q: Now, did you ask Constable Dew to -- 25 to bring this statement back to the Forest Detachment?


1 A: I don't know if I did or not. 2 Q: Or direct that Sam Poole get the 3 statement transmitted back to the Forest Detachment in a 4 -- in a quick manner? 5 A: No, I don't think so. 6 Q: Was time of the essence, in your 7 opinion at this time, in terms of getting the statement 8 to the Forest Detachment for further dissemination? 9 A: No. 10 Q: Why not? 11 A: Well, it was a damaged vehicle, they 12 already knew about that. And as long as it was valid, 13 having the statement wouldn't make any difference -- 14 Q: All right. 15 A: -- on the information. 16 Q: Fair enough. And I understand that 17 at about 8:10 you received -- sorry, you spoke with 18 Constable Martin? 19 A: Chris Martin, yes. 20 Q: And what was that about? 21 A: He was monitoring the videos and he 22 advised that there was a lone male in the entrance 23 building, which would have been the little kiosk to the 24 Park, he said obviously hiding out, and he keeps peaking 25 out the windows, so.


1 Q: And what significance, if any, did 2 you bring to this information? 3 A: Well, why would a person be doing 4 that unless they're trying to hide something or they're 5 trying to hide from something or, you know. 6 Q: All right. So you considered this to 7 be suspicious activity? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And did you direct anything further 10 to be done as a result of that? 11 A: No, I would -- I would have reported 12 that but Chris Martin said he'd continue monitoring it to 13 see what happened. 14 Q: All right. And he would update you 15 as needed? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. And at 20:20 there's an 18 indication that Constable Dew to go see Constable Poole 19 with respect to the -- the statement you told us about 20 that, I think. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And then at 20:43 it would appear 23 that Constable Dew reported back to you? 24 A: No, he didn't report to me, he 25 reported to the Command Centre.


1 Q: To the Command Centre? 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: All right. Were you present? 4 A: No, I -- I don't think I was when he 5 initially called in. I think I was in the -- like at the 6 Forest Detachment there was a big trailer that was 7 actually the Command Centre, and then the Forest 8 Detachment was -- was separate. So I think I was in 9 Forest Detachment and he called the Command Centre where 10 all the phones went through the radio room. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: And I -- he didn't talk to me. 13 Q: All right. What does your reference 14 at 20:43 refer to? 15 A: Well, he called in and -- and spoke 16 to -- I'm not sure who it was, either Stan Korosec or Rob 17 Graham or somebody, and advised that there were several 18 guns and ammo, gas bombs, apparently in the Camp and or 19 Park, and that women and children were being evacuated, 20 and something about some buildings were burning. 21 Q: All right. And this is reflected in 22 your notes. Could you just read that into the record for 23 me, pleases? 24 A: "20:43, Constable Dew advises the 25 Natives have four (4) SHF's, thirty


1 (30) detachable clips which fire ten 2 (10) rounds per clip, two (2) Ruger 3 14's, thirty (30) round clips, hunting 4 rifles and scopes, gas bombs. Women 5 and children are being evacuated [and 6 something about burning some 7 buildings]." 8 Q: All right. Now, did you actually 9 overhear this conversation or was this, in turn, relayed 10 to you by -- 11 A: It was related to me. 12 Q: Relayed to you. All right. By -- by 13 Graham? 14 A: Well, by somebody. It was either 15 Graham or Stan Korosec. 16 Q: Thank you. 17 A: I don't -- I can't recall. 18 Q: And was that information of 19 significance to you in terms of criminal investigation? 20 A: Absolutely. 21 Q: And what, if anything, did you do as 22 a result of this information? 23 A: Well, it was -- it had already been 24 passed on because I got it secondhand from the officers. 25 So that had been up to Johnny Carson and those to take


1 that if they were still planning to go -- allegedly to go 2 down to the sand lot to remove the First Nations people 3 from the sand lot. So that would be something for them 4 to weigh as far as how -- how important it was to them. 5 Q: Okay. But, in any event, you 6 weren't, at this point, conducting any criminal 7 investigation into that information? 8 A: No. No. 9 Q: All right. And then at 21:45 -- 10 A: Yes? 11 Q: -- you make a call, do you, to the 12 Sarnia Jail? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And what was that with reference to? 15 A: Well, the -- the ERT teams were -- 16 were deployed down to the sand lot. 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: And I was asked to call the Sarnia 19 Jail and advise them that if any arrests were made that 20 we'd be bringing them there, so. 21 Q: And were you asking specifically what 22 their capacity was? 23 A: I don't know if I did or not. I 24 think it was more like a courtesy call to -- to say 25 there's a potential for some people coming in and...


1 Q: And was it foreseeable to you at that 2 time that the potential was for several people to be 3 coming in as opposed to one (1) or two (2)? 4 A: I don't know if I gave a number. 5 Q: All right. And then in any event you 6 report that they would be able to transport six (6) to 7 eight (8) at a time? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And how did you come to know of the 10 activation of the ERT team which you've noted at 21:30? 11 A: I was told that they were heading 12 down. 13 Q: And were you told why? 14 A: Just so I'd know and be alert in case 15 there's any criminal activity or whatever would occur. 16 Q: And did you -- told what the purpose 17 of sending -- of activating the ERT was? 18 A: To have the people from the sand lot 19 get away from there because they're damaging cars and 20 causing problems for the public. 21 Q: Okay. Did you have any input as to 22 the deployment of the ERT? 23 A: No. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)


1 2 Q: Now, with respect to the information 3 that you were apprised of concerning the weapons, gas 4 bombs, et cetera, 20:43, did you play any role in 5 checking those facts? 6 A: No. 7 Q: And is that something that normally 8 would be part of your role? 9 A: I would, if it was a criminal 10 investigation. But I think Mark Dew called that in, 1, 11 to let everybody know that -- for the potential for 12 firearms and to alert the command staff that the 13 possibility of firearms if they were still going to go 14 down to the sand lot. 15 So there wouldn't have been much time 16 between when he -- when he got the information and when 17 the ERT teams were into position to -- to do any major 18 checking of -- of that information. 19 Q: It looks like there would have been 20 about forty-five (45) minutes? 21 A: Yeah. Or less, yes. 22 Q: And did -- did you -- were you 23 apprised as to what the source of his information was? 24 A: Who the person was? 25 Q: No. How did Constable Dew come into


1 this information? 2 A: I believe it was the victim of the -- 3 of the guy that had the car damaged. 4 Q: All right. And so did you -- do you 5 make any efforts to ensure that the -- the statement 6 taken by Constable Poole be transmitted back to the 7 Forest Detachment? 8 A: No. 9 Q: And why didn't you? 10 A: Because I don't think the gun 11 information was on that statement. I think -- 12 Q: But would you have known that? 13 A: Pardon? 14 Q: How would you know that at the time? 15 He had -- 16 A: Well, I would -- I wouldn't, but I 17 believe Mark... 18 Q: All right. Just -- just so I have a 19 sense of the mechanics here -- 20 A: Hmm hmm. 21 Q: -- when a statement is taken from a 22 complainant at a checkpoint, what is the means for 23 getting that statement to the Forest Detachment? 24 A: When the officer comes back in. Or 25 if it's a real emergency, somebody go and pick it up or


1 you'd have somebody relay it in. 2 Q: All right. And presumably Constable 3 Dew had been there? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And -- and presumably he could have 6 picked up the statement when he was there and brought it 7 back in? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Do you know whether he did? 10 A: I don't know if he -- when he brought 11 it in or if he brought it in. 12 Q: Fair enough. And did you have an 13 opportunity to review that statement at any time over the 14 course of that evening? 15 A: I would say, no. 16 Q: Okay. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: Now did you become aware that the -- 21 the ERT or the Crowd Management Unit and the TRU team had 22 actually been deployed down East Parkway Drive? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: How did you become aware of that? 25 A: We -- in Forest Detachment there was


1 a radio speaker and there was a few of us that sat around 2 that radio speaker when they were going down the road and 3 listened to what was going on. 4 Q: And were you at all surprised when 5 you heard that they had been deployed? 6 A: No. Well they -- they were sent down 7 at -- they were being prepared at 8:30. They left to -- 8 to go down to the area at 9:30 and they're in position at 9 10:40, so, no. 10 Q: Okay. And were you -- were you privy 11 at all to the -- the commands, if you will, or the orders 12 to deploy? 13 A: No. Not -- not down at the Park, no. 14 Q: Okay. And just to divert for a 15 moment, if you go to Tab 6 of your brief. These are the 16 scribe notes in Exhibit P-426, at page 74 of those scribe 17 notes. I'm looking at the 20:14 entry, September the 18 6th. 19 A: What page, sorry? 20 Q: 74. And the scribe note that I'm 21 interested in, reads: 22 "At 20:14, Mark Wright and Trevor 23 Richardson agree as to criminal offence 24 of weapons dangerous with the ones with 25 bats."


1 Do you recall having a discussion 2 concerning that? 3 A: I think we did. Yes, I -- I don't 4 have it written in my hand notes but this here is 5 probably an accurate reflection of what happened. 6 Q: And would this be based on the 7 information that you had received -- or at least that the 8 Command Post had received from Mark Dew? 9 A: I don't think Mark Dew mentioned 10 about the bats. I think it was called in prior to Mark 11 Dew going down there. 12 Q: All right, fair enough. Did you have 13 any understanding as to what this incident related to? 14 A: I believe it was the same incident, 15 only the car got damaged with a rock and not a bat. And 16 I think it was called in that there was bats involved. 17 Q: Did you become aware of the other 18 version, in other words, that a rock had caused the 19 damage rather than bats? 20 A: Did I become aware later? 21 Q: Yes. 22 A: Well, I became aware that it was a 23 stone used instead of a bat, hit the car. I -- I can't 24 recall what -- what was in the statement of the victim, 25 whether he said they had bats or not, I don't know, but


1 they -- they weren't -- ultimately they were not used to 2 -- to hit the car. 3 Q: And ultimately did you pursue a 4 criminal investigation with respect to that incident? 5 A: For the damage? 6 Q: Yes. 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: All right. And when -- when did you 9 pursue that investigation? 10 A: Well, when the statement was taken by 11 Sam Poole, that would start it. 12 Q: Okay. I appreciate that would start 13 it but when did you become involved? 14 A: Well, that night. 15 Q: That night, okay. And what steps did 16 you take in pursuance to the criminal investigation 17 relative to this incident that night? 18 A: Well, the statement from the victim. 19 I'd had to get a statement from Sam Poole which would 20 probably have been taken the day after, seeing as how it 21 got busy that night. 22 Q: Hmm hmm. 23 A: And to have Sammy verify that there 24 was damage actually to the vehicle and that the victim 25 actually knew who threw the rock, and apparently he did,


1 and as a result there was a charge laid. 2 Q: All right. And that charge was laid 3 subsequent to the 6th? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And you believe that you interviewed 6 Constable Poole subsequent to the 6th? 7 A: No -- yeah, after the 6th, yes. 8 Q: Yes. Thank you. Okay. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: I wonder if you would go to Tab 8 13 next, please? 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 Q: And this is a -- it appears to be a 18 transcript of an audio recording, 20:59 hundred hours, 19 September 6th, 1995, Chatham Communications Centre. And 20 it identifies yourself as -- as instigating or ca -- 21 starting this call. 22 Do you recall making a call to the Chatham 23 Communications Centre that night with respect to Paul 24 Evans? 25 A: I don't recall it but if it's here,


1 it's here. 2 Q: All right. Have you had an 3 opportunity to -- to listen to the audio -- 4 A: No. 5 Q: -- in preparation or to review this 6 transcript? 7 A: No, neither. 8 Q: All right. Can -- perhaps we could 9 play the -- the audio. I'd like you to listen to this 10 audio. First of all I'm going to ask you if you can 11 identify the voices and then I'm going to ask you some -- 12 a couple of questions about the contents of it and you 13 can follow along with the transcript. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Sorry. 18 19 (AUDIOTAPE PLAYED, TRANSCRIPT TO FOLLOW) 20 21 CCC = Chatham Communication Centre] 22 [TR = Detective Sergeant Trevor Richardson] 23 24 CCC: Ontario Provincial Police. 25 TR: Hi.


1 CCC: Hi. 2 TR: It's Trevor. 3 CCC: Richardson? 4 TR: It is. 5 CCC: Okay. 6 TR: I wouldn't kid you. 7 CCC: Well, actually you would. But anyways. 8 TR: Okay. Can you give me Paul Evan's pager 9 number? 10 CCC: Paul Evans. Paul Evans. Good question. 11 TR: Ident man. 12 CCC: Yeah, yeah, yeah. L, M, N, O, P - pagers. 13 No Ident. Okay. Their pager number is 14 for them to call DHQ. 15 TR: Ah, shit. 16 CCC: Let me just check at the front of the 17 book. See if there's anything different. 18 TR: Okay. 19 CCC: You're up at Forest, I take it? 20 TR: Yeah. 21 CCC: Can you let us know what's going on? 22 TR: Pardon? 23 CCC: All we know is that people are moving. 24 TR: Yeah, I know they are. Shit has hit the 25 fan.


1 CCC: Yeah? 2 TR: Hmm. 3 CCC: Can you give us info or no? 4 TR: No. Not right at the moment. 5 CCC: Okay. 6 TR: We will, though. 7 CCC: Well, you mean the official press release, 8 right? 9 TR: No, no. You'll hear a 10-3 come on. Ha! 10 CCC: Well, that doesn't make it any fun for us 11 down here. 12 TR: Well, I hear you. 13 CCC: No. There's no other pager. Just the one 14 for them to call DHQ. You want his home 15 phone number? 16 TR: No. He's not at home. He's up here. 17 CCC: Oh. 18 TR: Okay. I'll try to find him. Okay. 19 CCC: Sorry. 20 TR: Thanks. 21 CCC: Bye. 22 TR: Bye. 23 End of conversation 24 25 (AUDIOTAPE CONCLUDED)


1 2 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 3 Q: Now, were you able to recognize any 4 of the voices on that? 5 A: Yeah, one's mine. 6 Q: Okay. And did you recognize the -- 7 your counterpart? 8 A: No. I -- 9 Q: All right. And do you recall, at 10 all, making an inquiry with respect to Paul Evans' pager 11 number? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And what was the purpose of -- of 14 looking for him? 15 A: He's the Ident fella so we probably 16 wanted some photographs or whatever. 17 Q: Well, given the time of -- of this 18 call, 20:59, did you recall what you were looking 19 specifically for? 20 A: Could have been taking photographs of 21 the victim's car or it could have been taking photographs 22 down at the sand lot or it could have been a variety of 23 things. 24 Q: Okay. And I'm just being reminded 25 that because of the radio transmission with that


1 telephone -- telephone transmission we have to add seven 2 (7) minutes to it. 3 So likely it was at 21:06 or -- 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: -- or thereabouts. But for the 6 record, it's noted as 20:59. And you make the comment to 7 the person at the Chatham Communications Centre, you say 8 -- you confirm that: 9 "People are moving and that -- that 10 shit has hit the fan." 11 Now, do you recall what that was in 12 reference to? 13 A: Well, I only got the one (1) page 14 here so -- of the transcript. But anyway, yeah, it was 15 in reference to the ERT people heading -- heading out and 16 that the First Nations people had damaged a car and they 17 were going to go down. I assume that was what it was all 18 about. 19 Q: Okay. And when you say "they were 20 going to go down"; what are you referring to? 21 A: The ERT Team. 22 Q: The ERT Team was going to go down to 23 the -- the area? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Okay. And why were you not at


1 liberty to share that information with the Chatham 2 Communications Centre? 3 A: They would learn that later. 4 Q: Why were you not at liberty to share 5 it with them at that time? 6 A: I just don't share that stuff. 7 Q: Okay. And why not? 8 A: Not my position to. 9 Q: I'd like to make this the next 10 exhibit please. The transcript will be the next exhibit? 11 THE REGISTRAR: P-1674, Your Honour. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1674: Transcript of Region 01, 14 Chatham Communications 15 Centre, Trevor Richardson, 16 September 06, 1995, 20:59 17 hrs, Chatham Communications 18 Centre Logger tape number 19 146, Track 3, Disc 3 of 20. 20 21 MS. SUSAN VELLA: And the CD will be the 22 next -- the subsequent exhibit. 23 THE REGISTRAR: P-1675, Your Honour. 24 25 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1675: Trevor Richardson Audio CD.


1 2 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 3 Q: Thank you. All right. Now, 4 returning to your notes then, please, at Tab 3, and page 5 32. So in the meantime the ERT has been activated to 6 your knowledge? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And you've made this phone call prior 9 to that. What are you doing in the Forrest Detachment 10 while the deployment is ongoing? 11 A: Probably just doing some paperwork 12 and... 13 Q: All right. And were you able to 14 overhear any radio communications relative to the 15 deployment? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And which radio communications were - 18 - were you able to hear -- overhear? 19 A: It was the ERT Teams. We could hear 20 the ERT Teams on the radio. 21 Q: Okay. Did you also hear the TRU 22 team? 23 A: Don't recall hearing the TRU teams. 24 Q: All right. And did anything catch 25 your attention as you were doing your paperwork and


1 overhearing the -- the radio communication? 2 A: Well, I just have some little 3 excerpts. They tried to make some arrests. Then I heard 4 what sounded like to me was gunfire. And then someone 5 from the ERT advised that some gunfire at them and a bus 6 tried to run them over. ERT returned fire. No 7 casualties. And they were advised to back out. 8 Q: Okay. And when you heard what 9 sounded to be like -- sorry, did you hear any -- any 10 gunfire? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And when you heard that, were you 13 able to identify any specifics? You know, the number of 14 shots or the type of firearms or -- 15 A: No. 16 Q: -- or the length of time? 17 A: No. 18 Q: All right. And is it fair to say 19 that you -- you weren't necessarily concentrating on the 20 tape, you were doing paperwork while you were doing this? 21 A: It wasn't a tape, it was a speaker. 22 Q: Sorry, the speaker? 23 A: Yeah. Yeah, we were just paperwork 24 and then the speaker is right there and then when they 25 starting marching down we were listening to what was


1 going on. 2 Q: All right. And at 23:20 did you 3 receive any further communications? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: What did you receive? 6 A: Detective Sergeant Mark Wright 7 advises that we are okay, assuming that it the was OPP 8 ERT guys and that were okay. One of the Natives was 9 shot. Ambulance taking him to Strathroy Hospital. Two 10 (2) uniforms were following the ambulance and Mark Dew 11 and George Speck were enroute to identify the -- the 12 person and to arrest him for attempt murder. 13 Q: All right. And who -- who dispatched 14 to Speck and Dew? 15 A: I -- I think it was Mark Wright. 16 Q: Okay. It wasn't you in any event? 17 A: I don't think so, no. 18 Q: All right. And were you informed at 19 this time by Sergeant -- Detective Sergeant Wright as to 20 the grounds on which he had requested that Speck and Dew 21 ID and arrest -- make arrests for attempt murder? 22 A: Well I think it was a combination of 23 the -- the gunfire that they could hear. He had 24 information that I didn't obviously because people that 25 called into him.


1 Q: Right. 2 A: And then the bus and the car trying 3 to run people over, the gunfire, and so that -- and I 4 believe he talked to the Crown Attorney as well. 5 And that was the consensus of the -- 6 Q: Now were you privy to all of that at 7 23:20? Or is this what you learned over the -- 8 A: The is what I learned over -- 9 Q: -- over the course of that evening? 10 A: Yeah. 11 Q: Okay. And did Detective Staff 12 Sergeant Wright give you any further details with respect 13 to either the injuries suffered or the identification of 14 the person believed to have been shot? 15 A: No, he didn't know who that was. 16 Q: Was it your understanding that that 17 per -- the person in questions was enroute to the 18 Strathroy Hospital via ambulance? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Now given that that you were the 21 primary criminal investigator, why is it that -- that 22 it's Detective Sergeant Wright who is tasking your -- 23 your men with this arrest as opposed to you? 24 A: Well, he was higher up the chain than 25 I was so he can dispatch who he wants as well.


1 Q: All right. And then did you relay -- 2 sorry, the 23:30, 23:37 and 23:38 entries, was this you 3 advising Detective Sergeant Parent, Bouwman and Constable 4 Martin about this situation? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And did you relay to him what you've 7 relayed to us? 8 A: Just that shots being fired, people 9 are injured, going to the hospital, yes. 10 See, Randy Parent I had to notify because 11 I had to go to a funeral the next day for a friend of 12 mine that died and I knew I wasn't going to be there all 13 night. So I called him, advised him what was going on, 14 he was on his way up to relieve me, so that's why he was 15 advised. 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: Charlie Bouwman was advised because 18 he was the Detachment Commander and Chris Martin was 19 advised because he was watching the -- the man in the -- 20 in the kiosk. 21 Q: The video? Yeah? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: All right. And then at 23:40 what 24 happened? 25 A: Mark Wright advised that another


1 Native was shot and was currently on a private residence 2 on Nauvoo Road. And apparently a white vehicle was 3 involved that had blown a tire. Went to this address for 4 assistance. They waited for just a few minutes and then 5 they left. 6 Q: And when -- the reference to "they 7 waited for a few minutes and then left" what -- what did 8 you understand that to mean? 9 A: Well I -- later I found out that the 10 -- first they wanted an ambulance and they didn't wait 11 for the ambulance to arrive, they just took off. 12 Q: Okay. And you were advised of that 13 at 23:40? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: All right. And were you given any 16 other advice with respect to the occupants or any of the 17 occupants of the car? 18 A: Not that I know of, no. 19 Q: All right. And at 23:41 what 20 happens? 21 A: Don Bell was at the office there in 22 Forest and so him and I went out to the Nauvoo Road 23 address to -- 24 Q: And -- sorry. And whose initiative 25 was that?


1 A: Mark Wright said, can you guys out 2 and do that, so we did because everybody was tied up. 3 Q: And did Mark Wright tell you what the 4 purpose of you pursuing that car was? 5 A: Just to see who was injured and who 6 was in the vehicle, I guess, and make sure they get to 7 the hospital or whatever assistance they needed as well. 8 Q: All right. Did he give you any 9 orders with respect to any arrests at that time? 10 A: Yes, that the occupants were to be 11 arrested for attempt murder. 12 Q: Did he advise you as to what the 13 grounds for that arrest would be? 14 A: Just what I described before, the 15 fact that shots were fired. The car appeared to be 16 similar to the one (1) that might have been down at the 17 sand lot that tried to run the -- the officers over, the 18 ERT team over. 19 Also I understand that this vehicle would 20 have came out of the Camp, ran the checkpoint that was 21 there, almost hit somebody, apparently, and took off. 22 Q: All right. So those were the grounds 23 as you understood them? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And in your opinion, if proven true


1 were those adequate grounds for an arrest? 2 A: I believe so, yes. 3 Q: And why did Don Bell accompany you? 4 I understand he was an intelligence officer? 5 A: Yeah. He was there and he said he'd 6 come with me, so that was nice on his part. 7 Q: Okay. And so then did you -- did you 8 proceed to Nauvoo Road? 9 A: Yes, we did. 10 Q: And do you recall -- it was obviously 11 at 23:41, do you recall what route you took? 12 A: We took 12 County Road out of Forest 13 and then down Nauvoo Road, it intersects there, and went 14 to the address, the vehicle was definitely not there. 15 Q: Did you speak to the residents at the 16 address? 17 A: No, I don't think we did. 18 Q: Do you know why not? 19 A: Well, the vehicle wasn't there and 20 they already had his name and address, apparently, so we 21 could go back and talk to them later. 22 Q: And on your -- en route to Nauvoo 23 Road, did you -- did you pass any ambulances? 24 A: No, not that I recall, no. 25 Q: And obviously you didn't see the


1 vehicle in question? 2 A: Not at that time. 3 Q: And so you continued to where? 4 A: We then left the address at Nauvoo 5 Road, went down Nauvoo Road to 402; we figured that's the 6 quickest way that they would take if they were heading to 7 the hospital. And we drove all the way to 81 Highway, 8 got off, went to Strathroy Hospital. 9 Q: All right. And again, I ask whether 10 you saw any ambulance en route to -- as you went to 11 Strathroy Hospital? 12 A: No, I did not. 13 Q: And what did you and Officer Bell do 14 when you arrived at the hospital? 15 A: I told Mark Dew and George Speck what 16 had happened, about the white car and another person that 17 was supposed to be shot in it. And we then hopped back 18 in the car and we proceeded north on 81 Highway and went 19 over the 402 overpass. And then you could -- you could 20 see the car coming because of the sparks; because of the 21 flat tire it was running on the rim. 22 Q: Yes. 23 A: And it went -- went by us and I 24 turned around to follow it. And I went over the 402 25 overpass and a Strathroy Police Department cruiser got in


1 between that car and us, and it went right to the 2 hospital. 3 Q: And did you make any efforts to stop 4 the car en route? 5 A: No, I did not. 6 Q: Why not? 7 A: I was in a plain car, had no lights 8 or roof lights or red lights, so I wouldn't do that. 9 Q: All right. Wasn't your -- weren't 10 your directions to go and -- and stop that car and -- and 11 make arrests and render assistance? 12 A: Not necessarily stop it, no. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: Go -- go find the car. 15 Q: Okay. And according to your notes 16 you arrived initially at the Strathroy Hospital at 12:03? 17 A: Initially? Yes. 18 Q: Initially. And you spoke with 19 Constables Dew and Speck, and were they able to -- did 20 they tell you anything in terms of what was transpiring 21 at the hospital at that time? 22 A: Not that I recall, no, because -- 23 Q: Do you recall -- 24 A: -- we're only there just for a moment 25 just to -- and then we headed back out again.


1 Q: And it says that you headed back out 2 again, it would appear, at about 12:05? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: All right. And at approximately 5 12:08 you observed the vehicle in question? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: All right. Now, did you -- did you 8 follow it back to the hospital? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And what occurred once you got back 11 to the hospital? 12 A: The Strathroy cruiser pulled in front 13 of it; in front of the vehicle. We just pulled in behind 14 it and the occupants were -- there was a driver, a front 15 seat passenger, a rear seat passenger and the injured 16 person in the back seat. 17 And the three (3) people were arrested, 18 and I can't tell you who arrested them. I know there was 19 quite a few other uniformed officers there so I -- I 20 can't tell you who arrested who. 21 And the medical staff were immediately 22 there to render assistance to the person in the back 23 seat. I remember the -- the gurney coming out -- or the 24 stretcher coming out of the hospital and somebody hopped 25 in the back seat and then the -- the injured person was -


1 - was taken into the hospital. 2 Q: All right. Now, you indicated that 3 three (3) -- there were three (3) persons who were 4 arrested? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Now, do you recall before any arrests 7 occurred, did you take any steps to secure the scene? 8 A: Did I take any steps to secure the 9 scene? 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: Well, there were officers already 12 there, and the people were arrested and -- and they were 13 eventually taken to Strathroy Detachment. 14 Q: Who -- who directed that these people 15 be arrested? 16 A: I did. 17 Q: And on what basis did you direct 18 those arrests? 19 A: On the grounds I mentioned before. 20 Q: That were provided to you by Mark 21 Wright? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Did you form any independent 24 assessment as to whether or not there were reasonable 25 grounds to direct the arrest of these three (3)


1 individuals? 2 A: I believe at that time there was 3 enough reasonable grounds to -- to arrest them. And you 4 have to understand it was pretty chaotic at the hospital; 5 they had the one (1) ambulance in there with the one (1) 6 person that had been allegedly shot, and we had this car 7 coming in and then another ambulance pulled in. 8 And, you know, I felt that safety of the 9 officers and the medical staff was the most important. 10 And the public, I didn't know if there was any public 11 inside getting treatment at the hospital as well. And 12 certainly didn't know if guns were -- were available or 13 whatever. 14 So I -- that's why I instructed it and 15 that's what happened. 16 Q: And when you approached the car in 17 question, may I ask, did you approach it? Were you the 18 first person to approach it with Officer Bell? 19 A: No. No. The uniformed people, I 20 would assume, saw it coming in, because it was sparking. 21 And Mark Dew and George Speck knew that this white car 22 with a flat tire was -- was due, so they seemed to be 23 there fairly quick. 24 Q: Did you initially ask the driver or 25 any of the individuals to get out of the car?


1 A: Did I? 2 Q: Yes. 3 A: Not -- I don't recall that. No. 4 Q: All right. Do you recall seeing 5 Officer Bell ask the person in the back seat of the car 6 to get out of the car and go with him? 7 A: I believe he did that, yes. 8 Q: All right. Were you privy to that 9 conversation? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Did you observe the arrests of the 12 other two (2) occupants? 13 A: I would say, yes. 14 Q: All right. And starting then with 15 the driver, what did you observe his arrest? 16 A: It was -- he didn't fight or 17 anything. He was -- he was upset, obviously. I know the 18 -- the lady was upset. And they were, you know, doing 19 some yelling and that. I mean, not being offensive or 20 anything but just yelling about the injured person in the 21 back seat. And so, I mean, I didn't write down what they 22 said or anything like that, but. 23 Q: All right. And did -- do you recall 24 what they were yelling about in terms of the person in 25 the back seat?


1 A: That he had been shot and, you know, 2 he needs help. 3 Q: And do you recall whether any of them 4 identified themselves as relatives of the person in the 5 back seat? 6 A: Well, I know now they were. I knew 7 shortly after they were. But I can't say I did right at 8 that time. 9 Q: All right. And what did you observe 10 specifically of the arrest of the female passenger? 11 A: She struggled a little bit with the 12 female officer, but, I mean, wasn't swinging or fighting 13 or anything. As I recall, I think they fell down. But 14 certainly nothing belligerent or, you know, anything like 15 that. 16 Q: All right. And once the arrests were 17 carried out, what happened to these three (3) people? 18 A: They were taken to Strathroy OPP 19 Detachment. 20 Q: All right. Now -- I'm sorry? 21 A: I didn't say nothing. 22 Q: Okay. Did you observe any weapons of 23 any kind, either in the car or in the possession of the - 24 - any of the three (3) passengers? 25 A: Nothing on the three (3) passengers.


1 Nothing on the -- inside the immediate compartment of the 2 car. 3 Q: Or on the driver? 4 A: But the -- the car was seized and a 5 search was done on it the next day or -- I believe. 6 Q: All right. Did you see any weapons 7 in the possession of the driver? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Did the occupants, once they were -- 10 or at least the three (3) people who were arrested, did 11 they appear to pose any risk to police or public safety 12 once the arrest was carried out? 13 A: Once they were in custody? 14 Q: Yes. 15 A: No, they weren't. 16 Q: And were they handcuffed? 17 A: I believe so, yes. 18 Q: Did you make any observations with 19 respect to the injured man in the back of the car? 20 A: I didn't see him 'til later. 21 Q: And when you say "later," when's 22 later? 23 A: It would be several minutes later. 24 Q: In the hospital? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: All right. And did you make any 2 efforts to assist in the removal of the injured man from 3 the car? 4 A: No, I did not. 5 Q: Why not? 6 A: The medical staff was there and 7 that's what they do, so I left it up to them instead of 8 getting in the way. 9 Q: Do you recall how much time 10 transpired as between the time that the car stopped in 11 the parking lot and medical attendants arrived at the car 12 to remove him? 13 A: It was a very short time. Like -- I 14 can't say seconds but certainly withing a minute or so. 15 Q: All right. Now with respect to the - 16 - the occupants of the car who were arrested, did you 17 consider whether or not these individuals might have 18 important information to convey to the medical 19 professionals and whether or not they ought to be 20 permitted to speak to those professionals before they 21 were taken away to the Detachment? 22 A: Well, we knew where they were and if 23 the medical staff needed something of importance, we 24 could have got that fairly easy. 25 Q: Did you consider whether or not it


1 would be appropriate to allow them to stay in the 2 hospital in a detained way, pending the outcome of the -- 3 the treatment, if you will, of the injured man? 4 A: That's not normal practice, really. 5 When -- when you're arrested for something, you're, you 6 know, taken to a detention centre of some sort, this 7 being the OPP Detachment. 8 Q: All right. Were you responsible for 9 any other roles at the -- the hospital other than 10 overseeing and directing these arrests? 11 A: I assigned a couple of officers for 12 security for the people that came into the hospital. One 13 was for, it turned out to be the deceased, Dudley, one 14 was for Cecil Bernard George and one for Nick Cottrelle. 15 Q: All right. And did you have any 16 conversations with -- with either of the other two (2) 17 injured persons? 18 A: No. 19 Q: Did you direct any further arrests to 20 be carried out that night? 21 A: No. Mr. George came into the 22 hospital, and he was seated here and did a ceremony over 23 Dudley just around one o'clock. 24 Q: All right. And were you apprised at 25 all about the -- the injuries and condition of the -- the


1 other two (2) individuals? 2 A: I knew that Cecil Bernard was not 3 shot, that he had been in a scuffle. And Nick Cottrelle, 4 I didn't realize that he had not been shot until, I think 5 it was the next day or whatever, and it turned out it was 6 a piece of glass or steel or something that was in his... 7 Q: And I wonder if you would go to your 8 notes at page 33, it's at Tab 3 of your binder. And if 9 you would kindly go to your entry at 00:08, and would you 10 just kindly read that into record. 11 A: "00:08 observed white Chev southbound 12 81 Highway, sparks flying from left 13 rear tire. Turned around, proceeded 14 after it, and observed the Strathroy PD 15 pull in behind it and we both followed 16 vehicle to hospital where we blocked it 17 in. All occupants arrested and the 18 injured party in rear seat taken into 19 the hospital. Arrested people taken to 20 Strathroy OPP Detachment by Constables 21 Jerry Miller, Tracy Dobbin, Angela 22 Baker, Heather Taylor, Walt Vanessen, 23 and Bailey. 24 Another Native was also brought into 25 the hospital. The three (3) Natives


1 admitted to hospital were Cecil Bernard 2 George, Anthony O'Brien George, 3 deceased, and Nicholas Cottrelle." 4 Q: And you have the -- the latter two 5 (2) dates of birth? 6 A: Yes, I have the dates of birth of 7 those two (2). 8 Q: All right. And why was that 9 significant for Nicholas Cottrelle? 10 A: I -- whenever I talk to anybody, I 11 always try and get an address, date of birth. I guess 12 it's just -- 13 Q: Okay. 14 A: -- years of habit. 15 Q: And did you -- did you interview or 16 were you privy to any conversations with Cecil Bernard 17 George or Nicholas Cottrelle? 18 A: Not that evening. 19 Q: All right. Now, did you take any 20 steps as the primary criminal investigator to secure the 21 car? 22 A: Yes, it was -- it had been seized. 23 Q: You directed that? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And did you take any other steps to


1 preserve possible evidence? 2 A: Well, I had the people on security 3 for the -- the three (3) people in the hospital. 4 Q: All right. Did you order that any 5 gun residue testing be done? 6 A: No. 7 Q: All right. Why not? 8 A: One (1), I can't do it, it would be 9 an Ident officer doing it. Number 2, it's not very 10 reliable as an investigative tool because somebody who's 11 a mechanic they've got grease and that on their hands, 12 it'll come back as a positive too, so it's not a very 13 reliable aid for us. 14 Q: Okay. Fair enough. And I understand 15 that you then had a -- you contacted Detective Sergeant 16 Wright at 00:15? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: And what did you advise him? 19 A: Of the arrests and the people at the 20 hospital and stuff. 21 Q: All right. And then you assigned 22 Constable Boon with respect to security of the prisoners? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And Constable Murphy with respect to 25 the security of the deceased person?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And the vehicle was towed to 3 Strathroy Detachment for security as well? 4 A: Correct. 5 Q: And then you indicated that you saw 6 Mr. Maynard "Sam" George? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And at about 00:59? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And at 1:00 -- 1:00 a.m. what did you 11 do? 12 A: Detective Sergeant Parent arrived and 13 I advised him what had happened and where everybody was 14 assigned and where everybody went. And then at 1:30 I 15 went back to Forest Detachment with Don Bell. 16 Q: All right. And what happened then at 17 2:15 a.m.? 18 A: I advised Inspector Carson what had 19 happened at the hospital and then I went home. 20 Q: Did Inspector Carson express any 21 concerns about the fact of these arrests or the manners 22 in which the arrests had occurred? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Did you advise him or discuss with 25 him at all the fact that one (1) -- that one (1) of the


1 individuals had died? 2 A: He was advised that, yes. 3 Q: But did you talk to him about that? 4 A: I don't know. I -- I would assume I 5 did. 6 Q: All right. 7 A: Mark Wright would have told him as 8 well. 9 Q: And did you eventually go off duty 10 that day? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: At 4:00 in the morning? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: All right. Did anything else 15 transpire between 2:15 a.m. and 4:00 in the morning of -- 16 of note? 17 A: Not to my knowledge. 18 Q: And what were your feelings early 19 that morning with respect to what had just transpired? 20 A: My feelings? 21 Q: Yes. 22 A: Well, it was a sad situation, there 23 was no doubt about that. You know, I -- I felt bad 24 having to arrest the people and -- and taking them away 25 from -- from their -- it turns out their brother. And --


1 but on the same circumstances, I also had to worry about 2 fellow officers and medical staff and the public as well, 3 and so I had to make a decision, I made it, and -- 4 Q: All right. 5 A: -- that's where I am. 6 Q: And when did you learn that, at least 7 -- did you learn that all the other occupants of the car 8 were relatives of Dudley George? 9 A: Yes, I did. 10 Q: And when did you learn that? 11 A: It had to be the next day, I think. 12 Q: The next day. 13 A: I think so. 14 Q: All right. And when did you return 15 to duty on September 7th? 16 A: Two o'clock in the afternoon. 17 Q: All right. And if you would go to 18 the entry at 15:30; this is at page 35? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And indicate that you met with 21 Detective Inspector Goodall? 22 A: Yes, I did. 23 Q: And who requested that meeting? 24 A: I -- I'm going to say he did. 25 Q: What was the purpose of it?


1 A: Well he'd been assigned as the 2 criminal investigation branch, as the Inspector in charge 3 of the case now. 4 Q: In charge of what case? 5 A: Of the -- of the bus and car and the 6 shootings and all that stuff. 7 Q: Okay. And I'm -- just to be clear, 8 was this with respect to shootings relating to Dudley 9 George or relating to alleged shootings by First Nations 10 people or both? 11 A: Both. They -- 12 Q: Both. 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: All right. 15 A: SIU came in for the shooting of -- of 16 Dudley and we did a parallel investigation with them. 17 Q: Okay. And what were you -- what were 18 you told during the course of this meeting? 19 A: He advised that Nick Cottrelle was 20 still allegedly shot in the rear end and was being 21 released from hospital. He was taken to Strathroy OPP, 22 and he was going to give a statement. 23 Apparently, the bus driver that they knew 24 then was supposed to be Russ Jewel. We're getting a 25 warrant to do the photographs of the injuries of -- of


1 the First Nations people. 2 Q: Cecil Bernard George? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: And others? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Dudley George and Nicholas Cottrelle? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Okay. I just want to be specific. 9 A: Yeah. And Cecil Bernard sustained 10 injuries from the skirmishes and is currently in custody 11 at the hospital. And at that time we believed that 12 Dudley George was the driver of the car, and it was quite 13 a few days before we realized that he wasn't the driver 14 of the car. 15 The clothes of three (3) people had been 16 seized, and they were getting a warrant for that. They 17 were doing a warrant on the car. SIU leader 18 investigation was Wayne Allen and that myself and Mark 19 Dew were going to be doing some interviews with SIU on 20 the ERT Team members and the TRU members. 21 Q: Which ones in particular? 22 A: George Hebblethwaite, Wade Lacroix, 23 Kevin York and Brian Sharp. 24 Q: And why those in -- in particular? 25 A: I don't know, they just assigned me


1 to those -- those four (4). 2 Q: And you've assigned numbers to each 3 one (1) of them; George Hebblethwaite, six (6) -- 4 A: That's their -- what ERT Unit they 5 would belong to. 6 Q: All right. The District Number, 7 okay. 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: All right. And anything else? 10 A: That all the members involved in the 11 shooting were to be interviewed, to be done in the 12 presence of a lawyer and with SIU. 13 Q: Present? 14 A: Present, if they wanted to be. 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: Some they were. Some they weren't. 17 Q: All right. Now, just so that I 18 understand, based on -- on the information that Inspector 19 Goodall relayed to you at 15:30, or thereabouts, you were 20 advised that Russ Jewel was the driver of the bus? 21 A: That was a question mark. 22 Q: That was the thought? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: All right. 25 A: That was the thought of it. Yes.


1 Q: And the -- the belief was that 2 Anthony O'Brien George had been the driver of the car 3 during the course of the -- the striking of police 4 officers? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: That was the information that he 7 appeared to be operating under? 8 A: Yes. That's what we believed was -- 9 was happening at the time. 10 Q: And do you know what the basis of his 11 understanding was with respect to those two (2) 12 individuals? 13 A: Just information, I guess. 14 Q: All right. He didn't -- 15 A: I don't know. He didn't tell me who 16 he got it from. 17 Q: So you're really just receiving 18 information at this point? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And did you receive any assignments 21 at this point? 22 A: Just other than interviewing the four 23 (4) ERT guys. 24 Q: And is it fair to say that you became 25 --your -- your role changed at this point from what it


1 had been previously? Now you are the -- you're assisting 2 with the criminal investigation under Inspector Goodall's 3 jurisdiction? 4 A: It wasn't supposed to have changed. 5 Q: Okay. 6 A: I was still in charge of the -- we'll 7 call it minor criminal activity, okay? And another 8 officer, Mike Hudson, was supposed to do this part of the 9 investigation. 10 The interviewing of the ERT members and 11 the TRU members, they were all split up just so we could 12 get them done faster so everybody had an idea of what was 13 going on a lot faster. 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: And it stayed that way for quite a 16 while. I was still doing the minor stuff because we 17 ended up doing the damage to the St. John's Ambulance and 18 all that stuff that had occurred. It wasn't until a few 19 days later that Mike Hudson was called off the case and 20 became a go-between, between the OPP and the First 21 Nations people. 22 And that's when I then became more 23 involved with the parallel investigation with the SIU on 24 the bus and the car and I also still had the break-ins 25 and thefts and all that stuff that I had to do as well.


1 So we ended up with it all eventually. 2 But not right at this time. 3 Q: Okay. This time you're still 4 primarily in charge of the minor criminal investigations 5 or the criminal investigations with respect to other 6 activities -- 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: -- of the First Nations person; that 9 you were brought in to assist for the limited purposes of 10 conducting interviews with respect to Inspector Goodall's 11 investigation, or the investigation conducted under his 12 jurisdiction? 13 A: Correct. 14 Q: Is that fair? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Okay. And did you, in fact -- were 17 you involved in -- in -- in any further criminal charges 18 being laid? 19 A: Yes. On the -- on the damage to the 20 St. John's Ambulance and some thefts and stuff down there 21 that occurred. 22 Q: All right. And did you play any role 23 in investiga -- in the investigation relating to the 24 death of Dudley George at that time? 25 A: Other than doing the interviews, no.


1 Q: Or the circumstances under which 2 Cecil Bernard George received his injury? 3 A: No, I wasn't involved in that at that 4 time. 5 Q: And if we go to Tab 4 which is your 6 notes from your notebook. It's Exhibit P-1672. And page 7 4 of that document. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Sorry that's not page 4. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: Okay. No, sorry. Perhaps you could 17 -- no, that's okay. I won't go to that right now. Thank 18 you. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: Now you indicated that subsequently 23 you were -- you received a more permanent assignment with 24 respect to the parallel investigation with the SIU? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And do you recall when that was? 2 A: The exact date, no, I don't. I know 3 it was a few days down the road though. 4 Q: All right. And were you assigned any 5 role subsequently in relation to the defence of Kenneth 6 Deane? 7 A: I was assigned to assist the lawyer, 8 Norm Peel, to help him go through all the statements and 9 -- that we had been taking. 10 Q: All right. And was that in advance 11 of the trial? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: All right. And if you would go to 14 Tab 11. This is Inquiry Document Number 2005343 and this 15 is an affidavit that was sworn in relation to the Court 16 of Appeal, a matter of Her Majesty the Queen and Kenneth 17 Deane. And it was sworn on August the 5th, 1998. 18 Do you recall -- just having a quick look 19 at it do you recall preparing or at least signing that 20 statement? 21 A: Yes, I do. 22 Q: And attached to it is a further 23 statement it would appear, as Exhibit A. And is the 24 information contained in that statement true and 25 accurate?


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: I'd like to make this the next 5 exhibit, please? 6 THE REGISTRAR: P-1676, Your Honour. 7 8 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1676: Document Number 2005343. 9 Court of Appeal for Ontario 10 between: Her Majesty the 11 Queen and Kenneth Deane, 12 Affidavit of Trevor 13 Richardson, August 05, 1998. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 16 Q: Now, did you become aware that the 17 three (3) persons that you had directed the arrests of in 18 this Strathroy Hospital parking lot, they had been 19 released by the police without charges? 20 A: I was made aware to that, yes. 21 Q: And were you apprised of the 22 circumstances of their release, in other words, why they 23 were released? 24 A: I don't know if they did that or not? 25 They just said they were released with no charges.


1 Q: And as a senior criminal investigator 2 did this cause you any concern with respect to the 3 validity of Mark Wright's order to arrest these 4 individuals for attempt murder? 5 A: No, after I left at 2:15 there could 6 have been many other circumstances that occurred before I 7 came back at two o'clock in the afternoon that warranted 8 them to release them. 9 Q: All right. I wonder if you would got 10 to Tab 12 next, please. This is -- it doesn't have an 11 Inquiry document number but they were distributed 12 electronically. These appear to be notes from January -- 13 sorry from August 28th, 1996, through to February 3 of 14 1999? 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 A: That's correct. 19 Q: And are these your notes taken 20 relative or at least in relation to your ongoing duties 21 with respect to any Ipperwash-related matters? 22 A: Yes, they were. 23 Q: I'd like to make this the next 24 exhibit, please? 25 THE REGISTRAR: P-1677, Your Honour.


1 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1677: Handwritten notebook entries 2 of Trevor Richardson 3 (Ipperwash related notebook), 4 August 28, 1996 - February 5 03, 1999. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 8 Q: And if you'd go to page number 144 in 9 this exhibit and the January 23, 19 -- sorry, the January 10 16, 1997, entry? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: "Ten o'clock spoke with Norm Peel, 13 lawyer for Sergeant Ken Deane. That 14 meeting set for 23 January '97." 15 And then you have a notation of that 16 meeting right below it? 17 A: Yes, I do. 18 Q: And is this -- can you tell us what 19 the purpose of this meeting was? 20 A: He -- they had a pre-trial meeting 21 between, I believe it's Ian Scott was the Crown Attorney 22 for the SIU and Norm Peel and a judge, and they came up 23 with a -- according to Norm Peel of course, they came up 24 with a pre-trial arrangement -- agreement and he was 25 relaying that to us.


1 Q: All right. And what was the purpose 2 of relaying it to you? 3 A: Well, we had been assigned to give 4 him a hand in getting the witnesses together and -- and 5 just like SIU had the -- or I mean sorry, Ian Scott had 6 the SIU investigators to help him I guess they had agreed 7 that we could help Norm Peel because of the volume of the 8 statements and -- and getting all the witnesses together 9 and stuff. 10 Q: All right. Did you actually conduct 11 interviews of witnesses on behalf of Norman Peel? 12 A: No, we did not. 13 Q: And the balance of -- of the notes 14 appear to largely reflect your attendance at the trials 15 of those who were charged with Ipperwash-related 16 incidents and taking statements from various personnel in 17 relation to your investigation. 18 Is -- is that more or less an accurate 19 description? 20 A: Yes. It would be accurate. 21 Q: And were you interviewing Military 22 Police and DND witnesses as part of your investigation? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And how were they relevant to your 25 investigation?


1 A: Well, what had happened was we put in 2 a formal request for the DND scribe notes. When the 3 First Nations people took over the Base they had a 4 observation post that the DND had developed just to watch 5 and make sure everything was okay. 6 And so we asked for a copy of their 7 observation notes so we could just see what was going on 8 and see if it was beneficial, helpful, whatever. 9 Q: And what -- what kind of information 10 would have been helpful in relation to your 11 investigations? 12 A: Well, any criminal activity that they 13 deemed was happening outside their jurisdiction; gun- 14 related incidences. Anything like that would help the 15 investigation of course. 16 And -- but when we got them they were all 17 blackened out. I couldn't read anything and -- and 18 that's the way we left it. And then the Department of -- 19 the Military Police contacted us and said, Why didn't you 20 call us, like, Why didn't you get a hold of us for some 21 statements and that? We just said, We didn't know who 22 the -- who to contact. So, they said, Well, come on down 23 and we'll let you interview anybody you want. So that's 24 what happened. 25 Q: And did you -- so, first of all, the


1 documents you had been given were so heavily redacted 2 that they didn't provide you with any substantive 3 information? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: But you were subsequently contacted 6 by military personnel? 7 A: That's correct. 8 Q: And you conducted interviews of them? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And did you take statements from 11 them? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And were these used in relation, to 14 your knowledge, in relation to any of the prosecutions? 15 A: No. I don't think so. 16 Q: All right. And to be clear, these 17 are statements that are clearly taken -- were taken 18 months after the events in question? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: If not years? 21 A: It was -- yeah, years. 22 Q: Years, okay. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Thank you. I wonder if you would go 25 next to Tab 13 please. This is Inquiry Document 5000128.


1 And this appears to be a copy of an interview that you 2 gave in the presence of Mr. Sandler and Mr. May to 3 Detective Armstrong on behalf of the Coroner? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And do you recall that you did give 6 such an interview? 7 A: Yes, I did. 8 Q: Did you have an opportunity to review 9 this document? 10 A: Not -- not lately. 11 Q: Not -- did you review it at the time 12 or shortly thereafter? 13 A: Yes, when they provided a copy of it 14 I -- I read it over. 15 Q: And were the answers that you gave to 16 these questions true and accurate when you gave them? 17 A: Yes, they were. 18 Q: And do you adopt them today as true 19 and accurate? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: I'd like to make this the next 22 exhibit please? 23 THE REGISTRAR: P-1678, Your Honour. 24 25 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1678: Document Number 5000128.


1 Interview of Trevor 2 Richardson by Detective 3 Armstrong, March 11, 2003. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: And I just want to look at one (1) 7 thing at page -- if you look at the numbers at the top, 8 1668. And the bottom paragraph, you're being interviewed 9 with respect to the -- the arrests, et cetera, at the 10 hospital? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And you're asked: 13 "Can you briefly describe how you came 14 to be assigned to that area and what 15 your duties were?" 16 And you said, in part: 17 "I was assigned prior to the Park being 18 taken over as a preventive -- 19 preventative measures. My main duties 20 was to investigate any break and 21 enters, mischiefs, that were occurring 22 in the area and to assist with any 23 other investigations that popped up 24 during the occupation after it was 25 occupied, the Park, which included


1 identifying and charging several First 2 Nations people with unlawful entry into 3 the Park and several mischiefs to 4 cruisers, some break and enters. 5 Investigated the arson of the Park 6 convenience store being burnt down and 7 the Kiosk." 8 Is that accurate -- 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: -- an accurate description? And -- 11 and then you go on to say: 12 "And then later on after the incident I 13 was assigned to investigate a parallel 14 investigation with SIU as well as the 15 bus and the car coming out at the 16 officers. So I ended up with the whole 17 gamut actually." 18 And is that accurate? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Thank you. And if you'd go next 21 please to Tab 15. This is Inquiry Document Number 22 1000107. And perhaps, I know it's heavily redacted but 23 you could -- would you be able to identify this for us? 24 It's entitled, Number 1 District 25 Telecommunications Operational Contingency Plan.


1 And you're noted as being primary 2 investigations leader on -- on page 2. 3 A: This must have been given to the 4 radio room at Number 1 District just to given them an 5 idea of who's in charge of what and where. 6 Q: All right. And was this in -- over 7 the course of the -- the Park occupation? Do -- do you 8 know? 9 A: Yes. Well, it says that. 10 Q: Okay. Does it appear to be accurate? 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 A: Yes, it does. 15 Q: I'd like to make that the next 16 exhibit please. 17 THE REGISTRAR: P-1679, Your Honour. 18 19 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1679: Document Number 1000107. 20 District Telecommunications 21 Operational Contingency Plan, 22 Shift identification numbers 23 (Undated). 24 25 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA:


1 Q: And Tab 16 next please. It's Inquiry 2 Document Number 5000129. This appears to be a statement 3 that you provided, that perhaps you could take a moment 4 and tell me whether or not you recall this. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: Yes, I did. 9 Q: And who did you or what did you 10 provide there -- prepare this statement for? 11 A: For the brief of the car and bus 12 incident. 13 Q: And when you say for the brief, what 14 brief? 15 A: The court brief. 16 Q: The court brief? 17 A: Hmm hmm. 18 Q: For the prosecutor or...? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Okay. Sorry, I -- I just need to 21 understand. 22 A: Oh. 23 Q: All right. And was the statement 24 true and accurate? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: I'd like to make that the next 2 exhibit please. 3 THE REGISTRAR: P-1680, Your Honour. 4 5 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1680: Document Number 5000129. 6 Statement of Trevor E. 7 Richardson (undated). 8 9 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 10 Q: I wonder if we might take the -- the 11 afternoon break at this time? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 13 almost finished there -- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I -- I am almost 15 finished. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You'd prefer 17 to have a break now rather than finish? That's fine. 18 We'll break now. 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 20 for fifteen (15) minutes. 21 22 --- Upon recessing at 2:37 p.m. 23 --- Upon resuming at 2:55 p.m. 24 25 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now


1 resumed. Please be seated. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 6 Q: Were you present at a meeting held on 7 February 21, 1996 at which a discussion regarding the 8 Ipperwash policing operation occurred? 9 A: Yes, I was. 10 Q: And would you go to Tab 10 please. 11 It's Exhibit P-457. And I understand that you made some 12 comments at this meeting? 13 A: Yes, I did. 14 Q: And what was the -- your 15 understanding of the purpose of this meeting? 16 A: It was basically a debriefing of the 17 incident as it occurred and trying to get some 18 recommendations and/or some information and how we could 19 make it better or what we should change, what we can 20 change, whatever. 21 Q: All right. And I take it you had 22 some -- some views in that respect? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: And if you would go to page 3 of that 25 document and I'll just read it into the record. The


1 following is attributed to you or it appears to be 2 attributed to you. 3 "SERGEANT RICHARDSON: Personnel at 4 roadblocks were taking down items of 5 concern but were not taking down 6 anything of meaningful purpose. Should 7 have stopped vehicles but this was 8 ceased. 9 We needed more information coming from 10 the roadblocks." 11 Now, just stopping there what -- what were 12 you or what concern were you conveying at this point? 13 A: Well, during -- when the occupation 14 of the Park first occurred information from the 15 roadblocks or the checkpoints were very good, they would 16 report everything that happened and pass it on, 17 everything was great, with some exceptions of course. 18 But -- but after the shooting on September 19 6th and we ended up taking the roadblocks quite a ways 20 back from the Camp and the Park it seemed that nobody was 21 stopping anybody or checking anybody at the checkpoints 22 or roadblocks and, you know, a lot of information in my 23 opinion was driving by. 24 Q: All right. And did this hamper your 25 -- your ability to conduct your criminal investigation


1 subsequent to September 6th? 2 A: Not necessarily, no, but certainly 3 from an intelligence point of view and, you know, 4 whatever -- there could have been some criminal activity 5 being -- being done then, you know, and of course nobody 6 knew about it so -- 7 Q: All right. 8 A: -- that was my concern. 9 Q: Fair enough. And the next point is 10 as follows: 11 "Some unknown reliability because of 12 the many pieces of information coming 13 in. There was a lot of information but 14 there was no concrete proof of i.e. 15 weapons in the Park." 16 And what -- were those concerns that you 17 raised? 18 A: Yes, that -- 19 Q: And what were you -- 20 A: -- that was prior to the -- the 21 shooting on the 6th. 22 Q: Yes? 23 A: Lots of information coming in but I 24 just don't -- I didn't think that the officers were going 25 far enough to -- to do more checks and check vehicles a


1 little more -- a little more closely and see what was 2 coming in. And because we had information later on that 3 guns were coming and out from a couple of the individuals 4 but, you know, they -- they said they never got stopped 5 or approached or anything so that's what that was meant. 6 Q: All right. So the unknown 7 reliability was in part because the -- the officers on 8 the ground, so to speak, in your view, wasn't necessarily 9 going far enough to -- to check their facts? 10 A: No, check the vehicles. 11 Q: Check the vehicles? 12 A: Yes. You know -- 13 Q: Okay. Okay. 14 A: -- double-check the vehicles. Make 15 sure nothing was coming and going in and out of the Park 16 or the Camp, wherever the checkpoints were. 17 Q: All right. And if you go to the 18 bottom of -- of page 3 the following appears to be 19 attributed to you: 20 "SERGEANT RICHARDSON: Concern raised 21 of members be given direction for a 22 detail and then too many confusing 23 details being given to criminal 24 investigators by different members. 25 One (1) Incident Commander saying one


1 (1) thing, then the next Incident 2 Commander saying something else. There 3 was a lot of confusion as to what 4 needed to be done. This was controlled 5 by schedules being drafted for Incident 6 Commanders." 7 Now, what -- what was that about? 8 A: When you have a lot of commanders 9 they're -- one (1) will give you one (1) instruction and 10 then ten (10) minutes later another one will give you 11 another one that might even be opposite to the first one 12 that you got and so -- or you found out that the 13 assignment had already been done by somebody else so it 14 was kind of confusing. It was -- it was more of a 15 logistics thing than -- than anything. 16 Just -- if you want me to go and interview 17 somebody then let me go interview them and -- and then 18 when I get it done I'll tell you that I have. And -- 19 and, you know, just trying to shorten up the -- the chain 20 of command so that not everybody's dumping on you to go 21 and do stuff and you haven't got or -- or it's already 22 been done or -- so it was more of a logistic thing. 23 Q: And what timeframe was that concern 24 relative to? 25 A: Well, that was between I would say --


1 between the 4th and probably the 8th -- 7th or 8th, 2 something like that. 3 Q: All right. And -- and to continue on 4 page 4 a few lines down: 5 "SERGEANT RICHARDSON: Still the 6 concern of different people coming in 7 and asking different things to be done 8 and no one giving proper direction." 9 And then it says: 10 "It was suggested that this could be 11 improved upon having the request for 12 investigations, et cetera go to one (1) 13 person to make the request and the unit 14 had dispersing the details to members 15 in order for there to be less -- or in 16 order for less confusion. This would 17 work better than having a lot of 18 different members going to criminal 19 members. It was decided that the 20 request should go to the person in 21 charge of the unit." 22 Now -- 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: -- what -- what was that referring 25 to?


1 A: Well, it would be a uniform Member 2 would see something or something happen, he'd go tell one 3 of the criminal Members and he'd go and investigate it. 4 But, I may not know about it or I already knew about it 5 and I had somebody else going there, so I had two (2) 6 people doing the same thing. 7 So this way here, if all the information 8 comes, in this case, through me, then I could just 9 dispatch a specific Member to go do a specific task. 10 Q: So is this something like having, 11 basically, a one (1) stop shop, if you will, approach, so 12 that if it's information that's relevant to your 13 portfolio, to the criminal jurisdiction, then all that 14 information should come to you as the central person to 15 receive it, and then you can determine what needs to be 16 done? 17 A: Correct, yes. 18 Q: All right. And it was your 19 observation that that wasn't happening between the 4th 20 and the 8th, are you saying, or -- 21 A: Well, I'd say -- say the 4th and 6th. 22 Q: The 4th and 6th, in any event? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: People were going to different people 25 with various information instead of consolidating it into


1 one (1) -- 2 A: One (1) streamlined area. 3 Q: -- person? 4 A: Yeah, exactly. 5 Q: Fair enough. And clearly, as you 6 said, that -- that would be inefficient? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And that could also give rise to 9 inaccuracies and confusions with respect to the integrity 10 of the information? 11 A: Or -- and the details. 12 Q: And the details. 13 A: Exactly. 14 Q: And at page 5 you make -- at least 15 the following statement is attributed to you, or comment: 16 "Sergeant Richardson: Investigators 17 spent months following up and getting 18 statements and notes from involved 19 Officers." 20 And did that relate to your -- the -- 21 basically where you spent your time post -- more or less 22 post the 7th? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: All right. And was that a concern 25 that you were raising?


1 A: Just that, in my opinion, when police 2 officers are involved in an incident, criminal 3 investigation or whatever, they should automatically, you 4 know, copy their notes and do a statement and hand it in. 5 I mean it should be automatic. But 6 sometimes you -- they get busy -- they forget about it, 7 whatever, and you end up chasing them down trying to get 8 statements and stuff when, you know, really they should 9 supply that automatically as soon as they leave. 10 Like in this case, when people were 11 leaving they should have handed in their notebook, or a 12 copy of their notebook and a statement of what their 13 involvement was, and then it would have been all over and 14 done with. 15 But we ended up spending quite a bit of 16 time trying to find the Officers and get a statement and 17 their notebooks. And some guys got transferred and some 18 retired, so. 19 Q: Hmm hmm. All right. So in your 20 view, basically, immediately after the events or shortly 21 after the events of September the 6th, the involved 22 police officers should have been handing in their 23 notebooks and providing statements that they would have 24 authored themselves and voluntarily putting them in? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: So you wouldn't have to chase them 2 down for the next weeks or months? 3 A: Correct. 4 Q: All right. And that was obviously a 5 problem that you observed on this particular event? 6 A: Yes. Well there was a lot of 7 Officers went through. 8 Q: Okay. And page 6, at the top there 9 is a comment in italics: 10 "We must consider in future that if we 11 have a criminal investigation, that 12 some availability be made to them. 13 There must be communication between 14 head of criminal investigation and 15 Incident Commander." 16 Do you recall what that was about? 17 A: I think that was a comment made by 18 Inspector Goodall, Detective Inspector Goodall. I think 19 there was some communication lacking there between that 20 and the Incident Commander. 21 Q: Okay. The investigator being 22 Inspector Goodall? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: All right. And do you recall what 25 the nature of that problem was?


1 A: No, I do not. 2 Q: Under "Identification," the first 3 comment is -- or statement is: 4 "Surveillance video, lack of access to 5 crime scene, reasons of why was due to 6 lack of telephoto capability, Ident 7 Members were able to capture pictures 8 when taking photos on helicopter, 9 however, they were not of a good 10 quality." 11 Was this something that you raised? 12 A: No, that would be Ident raised that. 13 Q: All right. Okay. Did you have a 14 similar concern? 15 A: I didn't, no, personally. 16 Q: All right. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: And finally at -- no, I think -- and 21 that's it. Sorry, under page 7 to 8 under, "The 22 Intelligence and TSB," there are some comments -- 23 A: None of those would be mine. 24 Q: None of those would have anything to 25 do with you?


1 A: I don't think so, no. 2 Q: All right. That's fair. Thank you. 3 Now, we have heard some evidence in this Inquiry with 4 respect to items, and in particular T-shirts and mugs 5 which were created after -- in the aftermath of the -- 6 these events of September the 6th involving -- relating 7 to the policing operation. 8 Did you -- first of all, did you purchase 9 or were you given any T-shirt or mug? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Did you see any T-shirt or mug? 12 A: Not that I recall, no. 13 Q: Okay. Did you see any other item 14 that was made in the aftermath or to -- in relation to 15 the -- the Ipperwash policing operation? 16 A: I think there were some pins for Tex 17 Deane with his badge number on it. But I never got one 18 of those either. 19 Q: All right. Did you ever see any 20 police cruiser with a bullseye and arrow attached to its 21 side? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Or any beer can with a feather stuck 24 in it and police tape surrounding it and a hole in the 25 side of it? Anything like that?


1 A: No, I did not. 2 Q: And you indicated you -- you knew 3 about the Ken Deane pin but you didn't -- you didn't have 4 one? 5 A: No, I don't. 6 Q: Did you get any T-shirt or other item 7 that related to Ken Deane? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Were you ever interviewed by 10 Professional Standards Bureau with respect to any of 11 these items? 12 A: No, I was not. 13 Q: Were you -- were you interviewed by 14 Professional Standards with respect to certain video 15 taped comments that were made by Officers Whitehead and 16 Dyke? 17 A: By Professional Standards? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: No, I was not. 20 Q: Were you ever privy to any review of 21 any video taped recording over the course of September 22 4th to 6th at which derogatory statements were made about 23 First Nations people? 24 A: Other than the Darryl Whitehead and 25 Jim Dyke one.


1 Q: And when did you become aware of 2 that? 3 A: Well, Mark Dew and I actually 4 disclosed it because the video tape, initially, when we 5 made a first copy of it, the screen went blank, it went 6 blue, and we figured that was the end of the video. 7 And so we just shut it off and made the 8 copy and it was all over with. Well, when we were doing 9 it again, I forget who for, FOI or whatever, we were both 10 on the phone and that's when this screen went from blank 11 and then we had the audio recording. 12 So that's how that came about. 13 Q: So you came across -- you discovered 14 the video tape? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And it was in relation to, you 17 believe, a Freedom of Information Act request? 18 A: I believe it was, yes. 19 Q: And you -- 20 A: The first -- the first tape was poor 21 quality, or whatever, and so we made another one. I 22 believe that's what it was for. 23 Q: And approximately how long ago was 24 that? 25 A: I don't know. A couple of years ago,


1 three (3) -- three (3) years ago maybe. 2 Q: And when you saw that video tape, 3 when it -- when this image came on -- 4 A: No, it was just audio. 5 Q: Just the audio, okay. When the -- 6 when the audio came on, what was your reaction as you 7 heard it? 8 A: We finished it and we immediately 9 reported it and -- 10 Q: Why? 11 A: Pardon? 12 Q: Why did it merit report? 13 A: It was offensive. 14 Q: And offensive with respect to what? 15 A: To the First Nations people and -- 16 and something that shouldn't have been said. 17 Q: All right. Did you have any more 18 involvement in -- in that matter? 19 A: No. 20 Q: As the primary crime investigator 21 under Project Maple, do you have any recommendations to 22 make to this Inquiry which will assist in recommendations 23 aimed at ensuring that events -- similar events like this 24 do not reoccur in the future? 25 A: Well as far as the land disputes or


1 land claims, I think if -- if there was Treaties out 2 there that the Federal Government should be acting on, 3 that they're justified, then get at it and do it, you 4 know, instead of waiting forever. 5 I understand there's, you know, monetary 6 problems, et cetera. But I think they should address the 7 problem and -- and solve it and it would save a lot of 8 problems. Caledonia being another one. 9 As far as the OPP, as I've mentioned 10 before, me personally, I know if -- if that had happened 11 while I was still working then I would have certainly 12 identified the source of the information I got from when 13 I was doing the briefings with the Command -- the 14 Commanders, Unit Commanders, when were doing the meetings 15 every morning. That's one (1) thing that should probably 16 still be done. 17 And the one (1) thing to is the crime 18 scene. We should never have given up the crime scene. I 19 think valuable evidence was lost, personally, when you 20 don't get the crime scene for ten (10) or twelve (12) 21 days, whatever it was after the incident happened. We 22 shouldn't have backed out of there, we should have stayed 23 and -- and protected the scene. 24 Other than that, I think that's about all. 25 Q: And just with respect to the -- the


1 crime scene, I take it you -- you're talking about the 2 sandy parking lot area and -- and the immediately 3 surrounding area? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And unfortunately you were dispatched 6 to the hospital? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: In retrospect, ought you to have been 9 -- in light of your role as primary criminal 10 investigator, ought you to have been dispatched to that 11 area? 12 A: Well, they -- they pulled everybody 13 out of there so I wouldn't have been able to -- they 14 wouldn't have let me go down there anyway, so. 15 Q: All right. Fair enough. Then that 16 concludes the examination-in-chief by Commission Counsel. 17 I have been advised by Counsel for the OPPA that they 18 wish to conduct further examination-in-chief. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Can you give 23 me some indication, Ms. Jones, of how long this part of 24 your examination -- 25 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I had


1 originally, based on what my understanding of what Ms. 2 Vella's examination-in-chief would consist of, had 3 thought I would be about an hour. Given what the 4 examination has consisted of though, I believe I will be 5 about ten (10) minutes. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 7 MS. KAREN JONES: If you could -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 9 MS. KAREN JONES: -- give us a minute of 10 grace as we just need to -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: By all 12 means. 13 MS. KAREN JONES: -- set up some things 14 with Mr. Millar. I just have one (1) small area to 15 cover, Mr. Commissioner. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MS. KAREN JONES: And while we're waiting 18 for some assistance from Mr. Millar, Mr. Commissioner, 19 I'll just ask Mr. Richardson a few questions for the 20 background for this. 21 22 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. KAREN JONES: 23 Q: Mr. Richardson, you were asked some 24 questions by Ms. Vella about a conversation that you had 25 with Officer Goodall on the -- in the -- on September the


1 7th -- 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: -- when you came back on duty. You - 4 - and you had indicated at that time he told you that the 5 driver of the bus was believed to be Russ Jewel? 6 A: Could be. 7 Q: Could be. 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: And the driver of the car could be 10 Anthony George? 11 A: Correct. 12 Q: And I take it that part of your role, 13 when you assumed the investigator function for the joint 14 investigation, would have included making best efforts to 15 identify the drivers of those two (2) vehicles? 16 A: Yes, it is. 17 Q: And were you able to obtain any 18 information to that extent by interviewing people? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And can you tell us what you did? 21 A: Actually, it was the media, by 22 watching TV and reading the papers we found out that the 23 driver of the bus was actually Nick Cottrelle and -- 24 Q: Hmm hmm. 25 A: -- the driver of the car was actually


1 Warren George. 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: And -- 4 Q: And in terms -- sorry, just to -- in 5 terms of the media reports, were you able to find out 6 that Warren George was driving the car through newspaper 7 reports? 8 A: Yes, that's correct. 9 Q: And in terms of finding out that Nick 10 Cottrelle was the driver of the bus, did you do that 11 pursuant to watching television? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And in order to obtain that 14 information for use in court proceedings, were you 15 required to obtain the footage of that program that you 16 saw? 17 A: Yes. We executed a search warrant 18 and -- 19 Q: And -- 20 A: -- obtained a copy of the video. 21 Q: Okay. And was the copy of the video 22 that you were -- that you obtained related to a September 23 7th, 1995, City television news broadcast? 24 A: Yes, I believe it was. 25 Q: And I'd like to see if we can show


1 you this broadcast and you can identify it as the one 2 that you used to ensure that it was Nick Cottrelle who 3 was driving the bus. 4 Mr. Commissioner, I'm sorry. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 9 apologize for the delay I thought we were set up. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm always 14 amazed that we've done as well as we've have. 15 MS. KAREN JONES: It's remarkable. It's 16 very difficult. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I assume Mr. 21 Richardson knows what's on the tape. 22 MS. KAREN JONES: Absolutely. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So perhaps 24 you could describe it for us verbally and then we can 25 move on and we can show it later when we get it working.


1 MS. KAREN JONES: Well, I think we're 2 about -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Are we? If 4 we're there then let's wait another -- 5 MS. KAREN JONES: -- we're very close to 6 having it. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's wait 8 another couple of minutes. 9 MS. KAREN JONES: Okay. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 MS. KAREN JONES: We're 3 seconds away it 14 looks like, Mr. Commissioner, sorry. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I know a 19 verbal description isn't as good as seeing it, but maybe 20 we're going to have to make it do. We can still try and 21 maybe we could catch up to it later on. 22 MS. KAREN JONES: Yeah. Mr. 23 Commissioner, if -- if -- perhaps we can carry on and -- 24 and when we are set up properly we could play that. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Sure. We'll


1 just show it out of order. 2 MS. KAREN JONES: It may be out of turn 3 but at least it'll be as soon as possible. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think that 5 would work. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Maybe -- maybe we can 10 at least canvas cross-examination while this is going on. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 12 guess -- sure we can do that. 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well I think we can at 14 least canvas. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Who intends 16 to cross-examine and let's see if we can get that 17 indication so we know where we are for tomorrow. The 18 order is the OPP first. 19 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Fifteen (15) 20 minutes, sir. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And the 22 Province. 23 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Fifteen (15) minutes. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Fifteen (15) 25 minutes.


1 Ms. Panjer...? 2 MS. MELISSA PANJER: I think Ms. McAleer 3 is next. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, I'm 5 sorry. Ms. McAleer would be first, yes. 6 MS. JENNIFER MCALEER: Possibly ten (10) 7 minutes. 8 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Ten (10) minutes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. 10 Panjer...? 11 MS. MELISSA PANJER: Ten (10) minutes. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Any other 13 political parties? No, okay. 14 Mr. Alexander...? 15 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Twenty (20) to 16 forty (40) minutes. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Twenty (20) to forty 18 (40) minutes for Mr. Alexander. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 20 Rosenthal...? 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: About an hour, sir. 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: One (1) hour -- 23 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm also going to 24 request on behalf of Mr. Scullion. You indicate that if 25 this witness goes over to tomorrow, in any event, he


1 would request a -- 2 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We'll have to -- we'll 3 repeat it, that's fine. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: What I'll -- Mr. 5 Scullion couldn't be here and -- and if -- if the Witness 6 goes over to tomorrow as Mr. Rosenthal said, I spoke to 7 Mr. Scullion, he would like to reserve thirty (30) 8 minutes. 9 If the Witness is finished today Mr. 10 Rosenthal is going to deal with the issues for Mr. 11 Scullion. 12 MS. KAREN JONES: So one (1) hour for Mr. 13 Rosenthal, thirty (30) minutes for Mr. Scullion, subject 14 to that. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And, Mr. 16 George...? 17 MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: Ten (10) minutes at 18 the most. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And, Mr. 20 Roy...? 21 MR. JULIAN ROY: About thirty (30) to 22 forty-five (45) minutes, depending on what My Friends 23 have to say. 24 MS. KAREN JONES: Thirty (30) to forty- 25 five (45) minutes for ALST.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Roughly how 2 long does that total, because I want to know how much 3 of... 4 Our next witness is going to be here 5 tomorrow. 6 MS. KAREN JONES: Well, he's going to be 7 here. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's going 9 to -- 10 MS. KAREN JONES: He's already en route 11 so he'll be here. 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Three point one (3.1) 13 to three point seven (3.7) hours, so. 14 MS. KAREN JONES: That's fine. We'll 15 certainly get to the next witness. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I think we should 18 commence with the cross-examination. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I do too, 20 and we should just hold this down. And is there any 21 other examination that you need to do now or can the rest 22 of your examination be done at the end? 23 MS. KAREN JONES: No, no, that's fine, 24 Mr. Commissioner. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's it?


1 MS. KAREN JONES: I just wanted to -- I - 2 - we can't wait and I appreciate that, and I'd like this 3 to be played but we can do it whenever we're ready -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If this 5 raises questions that parties need to cross-examine on, 6 we'll just have to -- 7 MS. KAREN JONES: Yes. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- give them 9 an opportunity -- 10 MS. KAREN JONES: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- to do 12 that at that time. 13 MS. KAREN JONES: That's right. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 15 So we'll start now with Ms. Tuck-Jackson. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Good afternoon, 20 Mr. Commissioner. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 22 afternoon. 23 24 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 25 Q: And good afternoon, Mr. Richardson.


1 A: Hi. 2 Q: My name is Andrea Tuck-Jackson. I'm 3 going to ask you some questions on behalf of the OPP? 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: As you likely know, sir, one (1) of 6 the issues that the Commissioner has to consider at this 7 Inquiry is whether, and if so, to what extent political 8 interference played a role in the operational decisions 9 that were made during September 4th, 5th, and 6th, 1995. 10 You've told us, sir, in essence, that you 11 spent great deal of time at the Command Post between the 12 4th and 6th of September; is that fair to say? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And so I trust it's also fair to say 15 that you spent a considerable amount of time in the 16 company of then Inspector John Carson? 17 A: Periodically, yes. 18 Q: All right. 19 A: I had my own jobs to do, as well as 20 he did. 21 Q: I understand. Having regard to the 22 time when you were indeed in his company, would it be 23 fair to say, sir, that there was nothing from his words 24 or his actions that suggested to you that his decisions 25 in operational matters were in any way influenced by


1 political views? 2 A: To my knowledge, there was no 3 interference. 4 Q: And I'm going to ask you, sir, the 5 same question in respect of Mark Wright. 6 Again, for the period from September 4th 7 to the 6th, was there anything by his words or actions 8 that suggested to you that his operational decisions were 9 in any way influenced by political views? 10 A: No, there wasn't. 11 Q: Thank you. I trust, sir, that you, 12 as a police officer, understand that it is both 13 inappropriate and indeed improper for a member of 14 government, a member of the Civil Service, to direct the 15 police on operational matters? 16 A: Correct. 17 Q: And I trust, sir, that if you got a 18 sense that that was in any way occurring in a matter in 19 which you were, or indeed were to be involved, you'd be 20 concerned about that? 21 A: Absolutely. 22 Q: Could I ask you to turn up Tab 3? 23 They're your notes -- 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: -- they've been marked, sir, as


1 Exhibit P-1671. 2 And in particular, I'd ask you to turn to 3 page 1 and your entry for August the 30th, 1995. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And My Friend Ms. Vella took you a 6 portion of that note -- took you, rather, to a portion of 7 that note, and in particular the passage that reads: 8 "The Provincial Government has told MNR 9 and OPP to do what is necessary to 10 prevent Park from being taken over." 11 And as I understand your evidence, sir, 12 this piece of information was conveyed to you by Mark 13 Wright during a briefing on that day? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: All right. And you also told us this 16 morning that the comment itself didn't cause you concern? 17 A: Correct. 18 Q: All right. Now, you understood, sir, 19 having regard to what Acting Detective Staff Sergeant 20 Wright was telling you, that there was reason to believe 21 that there may be a takeover of the Park following the 22 Labour Day weekend; is that fair? 23 A: That's fair. 24 Q: On this day you were being told that? 25 A: That's right.


1 Q: All right. And I trust, sir, it was 2 your understanding that the Ministry of Natural Resources 3 was the landlord of that Park -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- so to speak? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: All right. Can I take it, having 8 regard to what you've just told us about your 9 understanding of the relationship between government and 10 police, your understanding of your obligations in that 11 regard and that you can't be directed by government in 12 operational matters, and that you'd be concerned if you 13 had any inkling that you would be, can I take it sir, 14 that the reason that you weren't concerned when this was 15 said to you by Mark Wright, is that you didn't take this 16 as suggesting that government was directing the OPP in 17 relation to the Park; is that fair? 18 A: That's fair. 19 Q: All right. Is it fair to say that 20 what you took this to mean is that the MNR, as the 21 landlord, was reaching out to the Police, in effect 22 making a complaint and asking for assistance as a 23 complainant? 24 A: I took it as them being the victims, 25 correct.


1 Q: Thank you, sir. Can I ask you then 2 to turn to page 19 of the same notes? 3 A: And we've heard evidence from you 4 that you participated in a commander's briefing that 5 commenced at around 9:25 in the morning of September the 6 5th? 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: And the notes that appear at page 19 9 of Exhibit P-1671 reflect your recording of what was 10 conveyed during the course of the briefing? 11 A: Yeah, just a brief summary of it. 12 Q: I understand. You were candid and 13 fair in your evidence this morning and that it was by no 14 means a verbatim account? 15 A: Fair. 16 Q: All right. And I can tell you 17 certainly we've had an opportunity to look at the scribe 18 notes which perhaps captured it in more detail of that 19 briefing. But leaving that aside for the moment. 20 You'd agree with me that in addition to 21 what you already told to us about what was conveyed to 22 you during the briefing, that it was also made clear to 23 your that MNR was seeking an injunction? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: All right. You told us in respect


1 of item 6, at page 19, that part of what was conveyed 2 during the briefing was that: 3 "If no one in the Park, we will try and 4 gain control of it." 5 And I think you added this morning that, 6 conversely, if there was someone in the Park, then you 7 weren't going to be going into it? 8 A: That's correct. 9 Q: All right. Fair to say that also 10 having regard to the piece of information that you had 11 during that briefing, that MNR was in the process of 12 seeking an injunction, it was your understanding that in 13 the absence of an injunction the police would not be 14 going into the Park? 15 A: That was my understanding. 16 Q: All right. And indeed, at no point 17 during the 5th, as the day went on, was there any 18 intention of actually going into the Park? 19 A: Not on my part anyway. 20 Q: Thank you. You spoke to us, sir, 21 about certain observations that you made on the morning 22 of September the 6th when you and a number of your 23 colleagues went down to the sandy parking lot to assess 24 the situation of the collection picnic tables -- 25 A: Yes --


1 Q: -- that appeared in the sandy parking 2 lot? And you also mentioned that upon your initial 3 recognizance mission, if I can put it that way, with Mark 4 Wright, you noticed two (2) individuals in the sandy 5 parking lot? 6 A: Yes, by the picnic tables. 7 Q: By the picnic tables. When the ERT 8 teams went down, is it fair to say that there were 9 approximately ten (10) to fifteen (15) Officers in 10 attendance? 11 A: Approximately, yes. 12 Q: All right. And as you told us, as 13 those individuals -- as those Officers arrived, the one 14 (1) protester, if I can put it that way, the one (1) 15 individual went back into the Park? 16 A: Correct. 17 Q: From your observation, would it be 18 fair to say that it was the mere presence of the Officers 19 that appeared to cause that individual to go back to the 20 Park? 21 A: I would -- I don't know what he was 22 thinking but certainly -- 23 Q: That's fair. 24 A: -- fifteen (15) or twenty (20) people 25 coming after me, I'd probably go too, so.


1 Q: There was no physical confrontation 2 between the officers and that individual? 3 A: No. 4 Q: And indeed that individual did not 5 come back out into the parking lot while the police were 6 there, did he? 7 A: No, he did not. 8 Q: You told us that you -- you pondered 9 the idea of actually affecting an arrest of that 10 individual, right? 11 A: If he hadn't have gone into the Park. 12 Q: All right. 13 A: All right. 14 Q: Thank you. Is it fair to say also 15 that it was your understanding as early as September the 16 6th and indeed probably earlier than that but I'm 17 particularly interested in the 6th, that the police were 18 not to go as you understood it, the police were not to go 19 into the Park; is that fair? 20 A: That was my understanding. 21 Q: Thank you. Now finally My Friend, 22 Ms. Vella, took you to your Affidavit that appears at Tab 23 11 of the materials. And that affidavit has been marked 24 as P-1676. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think it's


1 73. Have I got it marked wrong? 2 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I may have 3 marked wrong. I thought it was P-1676. Do I have that 4 wrong? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is this -- 6 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Tab 11. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Which 8 affidavit are we talking about? 9 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Apparently it 10 is 1676, Your Honour. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 12 very much. Thank you, Ms. Tuck-Jackson. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 17 Q: And if I -- if I can synthesize the 18 information that you're conveying in this affidavit, you 19 learned on January the 23rd, 1997 that in effect with the 20 blessing of Crown counsel, Ian Scott, you and Mark Dew 21 had been assigned to assist Norm Peel; is that fair? 22 A: Yes 23 Q: All right. If I can ask you, sir, to 24 turn to your notes at Tab 12. They have been marked as 25 Exhibit P-1677 and I'm particularly interested in the


1 entry that appears at page 148. 2 And notwithstanding the fact that it would 3 appear that you had the blessing of Crown counsel to 4 assist Norm Peel, I trust you'd agree with me, sir, that 5 you learned on February the 7th, 1997 that pursuant to a 6 direction from Commissioner O'Grady, you were to be 7 removed along with Mark Dew from providing assistance to 8 Norm Peel. 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: All right. And in particular, sir, 11 I'm interested in the entry at nine o'clock and that 12 entry reads as follows and I have to know 13 parenthetically, Mr. Richardson, it's an absolute 14 pleasure to be able to read your notes. The entry says: 15 "Received call from Superintendent 16 Parkin and our assistance to Peel is 17 being terminated by Commissioner." 18 And then it goes on to say: 19 "Peel advised and he will call 20 Superintendent Parkin and advise." 21 So just stepping back. I gather then you 22 have a conversation with Superintendent Parkin during 23 which he conveys to you that the Commissioner wishes your 24 assistance as I've already outlined, to terminate; is 25 that fair?


1 A: That's fair. 2 Q: You subsequently contact Norm Peel to 3 advise him of same; is that fair? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And thereafter, I gather, it's your 6 understanding that Mr. Peel intends to speak with 7 Superintendent Parkin further about the matter. 8 A: Yeah. Probably to inquire why or 9 whatever. 10 Q: No doubt. I then noted with some 11 interest that on February the 9th, 1997 at ten o'clock, 12 once again Superintendent Parkin confirms that you and 13 Officer Dew cannot assist with Officer Deane's defence. 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: So it appeared at that time to be 16 firm and final that that was to discontinue regardless of 17 what conversation Mr. Peel may have had with 18 Superintendent Parkin. 19 A: I guess all the questions were 20 answered. 21 Q: Okay. Thank you. Indeed, they may 22 well very well have been. Sir, thank you very much for 23 your time. Those are my questions. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 25 very much, Ms. Tuck-Jackson.


1 Is the video ready? I think we should -- 2 if it's ready we should play it. 3 4 CONTINUED EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. KAREN JONES: 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 (VIDEOTAPE PLAYED) 9 10 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, if I 11 can please ask that that be marked as the next Exhibit. 12 And what we played is a portion of the copy of the 13 September 7th, 1995 City Television news broadcast. 14 And just again for the record it starts at 15 59:10 and ends at 1:04:41. And can I please -- 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: What we may do is try 17 to get an extract lifted. But if My Friend has a copy of 18 the video that we could mark -- what we'll do is we'll 19 get an extract -- that extract lifted and put on a CD. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: On a disc? 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 23 Jones? 24 MS. KAREN JONES: In -- I'm sorry. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What number?


1 THE REGISTRAR: P-1681. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1681. 3 4 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1681: Reserved. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MS. KAREN JONES: 7 Q: And can I ask you sir, is that the 8 footage that was used to identify, first of all, the 9 father of the driver of the bus and then the driver of 10 the bus? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Thank you. And those are my 13 questions, Mr. Commissioner. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 15 Ms. Jones. Ms. Tuck-Jackson, do you have any cross 16 arising out of that? 17 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: No, sir but 18 thank you for asking me. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 20 Okay. We're up to Ms. McAleer, then. 21 22 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. JENNIFER MCALEER: 23 Q: Good afternoon Sergeant Richardson. 24 A: Good afternoon. 25 Q: My name is Jennifer McAleer and I'm


1 one of the lawyers who's acting for the former premier, 2 Mike Harris. 3 A: Okay. 4 Q: I only have a couple of questions 5 because Ms. Tuck-Jackson took most of mine. 6 If you could start by turning to Tab 3 of 7 your notes, page 19 of your notes. Ms. Tuck-Jackson took 8 you to this, as well. It's Tab -- Tab 3, page 19 of 9 Exhibit P-1617. It's your notes with respect to your 10 meeting at the Command Post at 9:25 a.m. on September 11 5th. 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Now with respect to number 5 at the 14 bottom, I believe when Ms. Vella asked you about this 15 earlier today, you indicated that it stated, "PM 16 notified". I think it says, "PM to be notified"; is 17 that -- 18 A: That's correct. 19 Q: -- is that correct? 20 A: That's what I was to understand, yes. 21 Q: Okay. And I take it since you told 22 Ms. Vella that you didn't have any independent 23 recollection of this meeting, that you don't have any 24 independent recollection as to the circumstances that led 25 to you making this note.


1 A: This is what Inspector Carson told me 2 and they're just point form of what he advised. 3 Q: And you don't recall anything more 4 about that? 5 A: That -- whether he was or not, you 6 mean? 7 Q: Exactly. Or the circumstances that 8 led you to make that -- 9 A: I have no idea if the Premier was 10 notified or not. 11 Q: Okay. Now turning to the scribe 12 notes which is Exhibit 426 and it's Tab 6 of your 13 materials. These are the scribe notes of another Command 14 Post meeting that took place on September 6th. And I'm 15 looking at page 62 and 63 of those notes from 14:27 16 hours. 17 Do you have that, sir? 18 A: Yes, I do. 19 Q: And at the top where it says 14:27, 20 we see that you are in attendance, Trevor Richardson. Do 21 you -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- see that? Now we turn the page, 24 the third full paragraph on page 63. It begins with, 25 "Sergeant Seltzer" but then it says:


1 "Trevor Richardson advises told by 2 Elders that there is no burial ground 3 on that part of the land." 4 Now do you recall, sir, speaking at the 5 Command Post about the issue of whether or not there was 6 a burial ground in the Provincial Park? 7 A: Yes, I did. 8 Q: Okay. So when -- when it says "no 9 burial" "on that part of the land" we're talking about 10 the Provincial Park? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: Okay. And do you recall what 13 inquiries you had made to determine whether or not there 14 was a burial ground on the Provincial Park? 15 A: That invest -- or that information 16 came from one of the Kettle Point police officers. I -- 17 I can't remember which one -- 18 Q: Okay. 19 A: -- but he had mentioned that he had 20 talked to a couple of the Elders on Kettle Point and they 21 advised that there was no burial ground there. 22 Q: Okay. You don't recall the name of 23 the officer. Do you recall when you had that 24 conversation with him? 25 A: Obviously, prior to this. I'm not


1 sure when. 2 Q: But you don't know if it was the 4th 3 or the 5th -- 4 A: No, I don't. 5 Q: -- or the morning of the 6th? 6 A: Well I wasn't up there before the 4th 7 so it had to be between the 4th and -- and this. 8 Q: Do you recall anything else about 9 what he told you on that subject? 10 A: No. We were -- it was just a brief - 11 - brief conversation on that. 12 Q: Thank you. Those are all of my 13 questions. 14 A: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 16 Ms. Panjer...? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 MS. MELISSA PANJER: Good afternoon. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 22 23 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. MELISSA PANJER: 24 Q: Good afternoon, Mr. Richardson. 25 A: Good afternoon.


1 Q: When you spoke to Mark Wright on 2 March (sic) 30th, he told you that you attended a meeting 3 the previous day. 4 A: On August 30th? 5 Q: Yes. That -- that's page 1 of -- 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: -- Tab 3, P-1671 I believe. 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And the Commission has heard evidence 10 from Inspector Carson that at the meeting, he said that 11 he regarded any occupation of Ipperwash Provincial Park 12 as different from the issues at West Ipperwash Beach 13 where the Kettle and Stony Point Band had initiated a 14 land claim. 15 And Inspector Carson also said that -- 16 said to those who were in attendance at the meeting that 17 he regarded a potential occupation of the Park as 18 illegal. 19 And I understand that you didn't attend 20 that meeting but you were briefed on it by Mark Wright. 21 A: The following day, yes. 22 Q: On the following day. And I take it 23 that before the occupation occurred, you, like Inspector 24 Carson, regarded any possible occupation of the Park as 25 an illegal occupation?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And the Commission has also heard 3 evidence that other members of the OPP were aware of 4 research into the question of title to the Park and 5 understood that the Province had clear title to the Park. 6 A: That was my understanding. 7 Q: Thank you. And we've also heard 8 evidence that in 1994, the OPP provided training to those 9 officers who were policing West Ipperwash Beach. 10 And at the training, the officers were 11 given a package that included a list of charges that 12 might apply there, in the same way that you prepared a 13 list of charges that might apply in the case of the 14 potential occupation. 15 And that training package also referred to 16 the concept that the OPP was a neutral entity and would 17 take -- take enforcement action against anyone who breaks 18 the law regardless of race. 19 And we've heard from other officers who 20 have testified that they were aware of this concept that 21 enforcing the law the OPP doesn't treat anyone 22 differently on the basis of race and I take it that you 23 would have been familiar with that concept in 1995 as 24 well? 25 A: That's right.


1 Q: And just with respect to your note 2 regarding your briefing with Mark Wright on August the 3 30th I take it that you would have made that note at or 4 around the time of that briefing? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And the Commission has heard evidence 7 from Inspector Carson that early in the morning of 8 September the 5th he spoke to Chief Tom Bressette who 9 advised that the Band had not made a claim to the Park 10 and that no one else had made -- initiated a claim to the 11 Park. 12 And if you take a look at your notes at 13 page 19 -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: -- of that briefing, I believe 16 there's a note that says, Chief Bressette advised and 17 agrees with us? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And on the morning of the 5th then 20 you would have understood that Chief Bressette had agreed 21 that the Park belonged to the Province and there was no 22 claim to the Park by -- 23 A: That's my -- that's my understanding. 24 Q: -- by the Band or anyone else? 25 A: That's my understanding, yes.


1 Q: And I'd like to clarify a point with 2 respect to the withdrawal of some of the criminal 3 charges. 4 I have a document that I'd like to pass up 5 to you. 6 A: You may be asking the wrong person. 7 It should be the Crown Attorney. 8 Q: Well, it's a -- a document that you 9 authored, so. 10 A: Okay. Thank you. 11 Q: This is Inquiry Document 2001441, and 12 it appears to be a fax dated February 6th, 1997, from you 13 to Superintendent Parkin. I'll just give you a chance to 14 review that. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 A: I'm familiar with the memo from -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: -- the Crown Attorney. 21 Q: And the fax states that the defence 22 of colour of right doesn't apply to forceful entry 23 charges. And the charges of forcible entry were 24 withdrawn because the Crown couldn't -- couldn't identify 25 the people and/or couldn't establish specifically when,


1 where, or how they made entry and so there was no 2 reasonable prospect of conviction. 3 Does that accord with your recollection of 4 why those charges were withdrawn? 5 A: That's why he withdrew them. I don't 6 know if I agree with it totally. 7 Q: Could you elaborate? 8 A: I believe that we provided a brief 9 that was in full detail of everything that had happened 10 there and it -- 11 Q: So you think -- 12 A: -- was his -- it was his opinion that 13 it wasn't. 14 Q: So you believe that there was 15 sufficient evidence to establish that? 16 A: I do. 17 Q: And finally on the evening of the 6th 18 you arrived back at the detachment at about 18:00 hours 19 after you went looking for the -- the car that was stuck 20 at Port Franks in the beach with Don Bell? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And Inspector Carson has testified 23 that when he went off-duty on the evening of September 24 the 6th which was at approximately 7:20 p.m. he expected 25 that things would be similar to the previous evening and


1 it was his intention that the OPP would maintain the 2 checkpoints, they would monitor with night vision, and 3 they would wait for the injunction the next day. 4 So around the time that you would have 5 arrived back at the detachment and before you would have 6 received any reports about what was happening at the 7 scene was that your understanding of what the plan was 8 for the OPP for that evening? 9 A: I don't know if I could testify to 10 that if I wasn't privy to what he was telling other 11 people. 12 Q: Did you have any expectation -- 13 A: It was status -- 14 Q: -- that any -- 15 A: -- it was status quo. 16 Q: Status quo, okay. Thank you very 17 much. Those are my questions. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 19 very much. 20 Mr. Alexander...? 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: 25 Q: Good morning, Detective Sergeant


1 Richardson. 2 A: Afternoon. 3 Q: Now, just out of curiosity, is that 4 the appropriate way to address you given that you've 5 retired or is that -- 6 A: Trevor Richardson, Trevor, whatever, 7 that's fine. 8 Q: I'll stick to Detective Sergeant 9 Richardson just to be safe. 10 A: Okay. Thank you. 11 Q: My name is Basil Alexander and I'm 12 one of the lawyers for the Estate of Dudley George and 13 several members of the George family including Sam 14 George, who is sitting here beside me and that you met on 15 the evening of September the 6th. 16 A: I did. 17 Q: I have a few areas that I'd like to 18 ask you several questions about and I'm going to try to 19 do it chronologically. 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: So I'm going to start with the 22 evening of September 6th or the afternoon of September 23 6th with respect to the sighting of the gun butt. Now, 24 as I understand your evidence, even though it's not in 25 your notes you believe that you were told about the gun


1 butt by Constable Whelan that afternoon, shortly after 2 everything was done, correct? 3 A: That had been on the 4th. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 5 minute, sir. 6 Yes, Ms. Jones...? 7 MS. KAREN JONES: Sorry, I -- Mr. 8 Richardson can certainly care for himself. I was just 9 pointing out that it was the 4th and not the 6th. I 10 didn't want him to be confused by the question. 11 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: That was my 12 mistake. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: September 14 4th is the -- 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: 17 Q: September the 4th? 18 A: Yeah around 4:00 in the afternoon. 19 Q: Okay. Did he tell you that he saw it 20 from 40 to 50 feet away? 21 A: Did he tell me he saw that? 22 Q: Did he tell you he saw it from 40 to 23 50 feet away? 24 A: No, he didn't tell me how far he was 25 away, no.


1 Q: Did he tell you that he saw it for a 2 split second or a fraction of a second only? 3 A: He said he saw it for a just a brief 4 moment, yes. 5 Q: I want to move ahead now to the 6 evening of September 4th, this issue of fireworks and 7 flares. Now, if I go to your notes and that's at Tab 3, 8 which is Inquiry Document 1000858, which has been marked 9 as Exhibit P-1671 and if I turn to page 14 and I'm 10 referring to the 14 of the circle -- 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: -- it appears at 21:48 that Constable 13 Speck returned from the Park and then in the middle of 14 the page, that firecrackers were thrown at police, 15 correct? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And this is the earliest indication 18 of what was thrown at police that evening to -- 19 A: That's what I was advised. 20 Q: And you have no reason to doubt 21 what's -- what you were told that evening by Constable 22 Speck, correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: If I turn to page 15 -- 25 A: Yes?


1 Q: -- at 22:25, information received 2 from Constable Mark Zacher, ERT Member. 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Again down, 21:15 hours, and then 5 skipping down again, they had some fireworks with them? 6 A: That's correct. 7 Q: So again it seems that the 8 information you're receiving that evening, hours after 9 the incident had occurred is that fireworks are involved, 10 correct? 11 A: That's what I was told, yes. 12 Q: And then if I flip ahead to page 18, 13 at 09:20 hours at the bottom of the page. 14 A: Yes? 15 Q: "Advised by Constable Parks that 04 16 September '95, 21:15 flare thrown at 17 him and he had to move to avoid being 18 hit. Suspect is David George." 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: So it appears from your notes and 21 from what you were told that the first instance that you 22 were told that it was flares and not fireworks was the 23 next day in the morning, correct? 24 A: It was -- yes. When I spoke to Larry 25 Parks, that's correct. He confirmed there was a flare


1 and not fireworks. 2 Q: And you have -- you weren't there to 3 see what actually happened, correct? 4 A: No, I wasn't. No, I was on my way 5 home. 6 Q: And all three (3) of these 7 individuals were at the Park that evening, correct? 8 A: Yes. I don't know if George Speck 9 was there when the actual takeover happened. I think he 10 went down after. 11 Q: That's -- we have George Speck's 12 evidence on that and according to his evidence he was 13 there. 14 A: Okay. 15 Q: That's his evidence and we'll let 16 that evidence speak for itself, so. 17 A: Okay. Fine thank you. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, I'm going to go a little bit 22 backwards and then go forward again. If I could turn you 23 to page 1 of your notes and this is August 30th, 1995. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And My Friend, Ms. Tuck-Jackson, took


1 you to information that Detective Sergeant Mark Wright 2 told you. Namely: 3 "The Provincial Government has told MNR 4 and OPP to do what is necessary to 5 prevent the Park from being take over." 6 Now, you were obviously -- you recalled 7 this information because it's in your notes, correct? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And you have no reason to dispute 10 this -- that this information was told to you? 11 A: No. 12 Q: And so this became part of your 13 thinking about the operation at that time. Would that be 14 fair as part of the information? 15 A: Well I took it that they're going to 16 be the victims. I really did. That -- and they're going 17 to get injunction, keep the peace. If you have to make 18 arrests, make arrests, whatever you've got to do. 19 Q: But this is part of the information 20 that you're aware of now with respect to the operation, 21 correct? 22 A: Yes. Yeah. 23 Q: I'm now going to go ahead to page 19. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: This is again, of your notes. And My


1 Friend, Ms. Tuck-Jackson again took you to the issue of - 2 - and My Friend, Ms. McAleer, took you to the issue of 3 Number 5 where you originally testified the Premier's 4 office notified and you say the Premier's to be notified. 5 A: To be notified, that's correct. 6 Q: Now, I want to assist you with your 7 recollection on this. Now if I take you to Tab 6 at page 8 25, these are the typed scribe notes, Inquiry Document 9 Number 1002419, Exhibit P-426. 10 If you turn the page back to page 24, 11 you'll see there's notes about a meeting at 09:25 hours 12 that continue on to page 25. 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And you'll see that you're the first 15 person at the meeting so this appears to be the same 16 meeting. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: And if you go to the top of page 25, 19 John Carson is discussing things. 20 "Advised that Staff Sergeant Lacroix 21 has been in contact with Marcel 22 Beaubien, local Member of Parliament. 23 He is updating the Premier on the 24 situation." 25 Does that assist your recollection with


1 what information you were told at this meeting? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: Do you adopt what's in the scribe 4 notes as what you were told in the meeting? 5 A: That's what it says, absolutely. 6 Q: So you were aware of this information 7 at this time at the meeting? You would have been -- 8 A: That's -- that was what was in my 9 notes. 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: The Premier to be notified. That's - 12 - I don't know if he was notified at that time or not. 13 Q: No, it's fair enough. I'm just 14 trying to get a sense of what information you would have 15 been aware of at this point. 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: So and this would have been added to 18 the information that you were aware in the context of the 19 operation, correct? 20 A: That's what it says, yes. 21 Q: Okay. Now, I'm going to move ahead 22 to page 39 in the scribe notes. And the reason why I'm 23 using the scribe notes, Detective Sergeant, is when I 24 look at your notes at Tab 3, I don't see a corresponding 25 entry to what I'm going to show you.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: And so I'm going to see if this 3 assists your recollection on this. 4 A: Okay then. 5 Q: If you look at the bottom of page 39, 6 is says: 7 "Detective Sergeant Richardson advised 8 that warrants have been issued." 9 And then if you watch as it continues onto 10 the next page it appears to be minutes of a meeting 11 that's going on and at the very end it says: 12 "John Carson advised that the next 13 meeting to be held at 18:50 hours 14 before a new crowd comes in." 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Does this assist your recollection as 17 to whether or not you were attending this meeting? 18 A: Well, I -- I was there because I made 19 a comment on the warrants. 20 Q: Now, if I take you to the bottom of 21 page 40 -- 22 A: Yes? 23 Q: -- it says: 24 "Inspector Carson updated Chief Coles 25 that Marcel Beaubien had contacted the


1 Premier. There is to be a press 2 release by the Solicitor General 3 stating that this is not an Indian 4 issue, it is an MNR and a Provincial 5 issue." 6 Do you recall that information being said 7 at the meeting? 8 A: I don't recall it, but it's in the 9 minutes so I -- I would adopt it, yes. 10 Q: And you take no dispute with it at 11 all? 12 A: No dispute at all. 13 Q: And this would be part of the 14 information that you would have been aware of at this 15 point in the operation? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And it would have been added to all 18 of the information that's part of your thinking now at 19 this time about the operation? 20 A: Well, personally I wouldn't care if 21 the Premier was notified or not. It had nothing to do 22 with my job. So -- 23 Q: It still -- 24 A: -- whoever -- whoever wants to notify 25 the Premier or anybody may do so.


1 Q: But it's still part of the 2 information that you're now aware of with respect to this 3 operation? 4 A: Yeah, but it didn't affect me. 5 Q: I didn't say it -- I didn't ask if it 6 affected you, sir. 7 A: Okay. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 Q: Now, if I could take you back to Tab 12 3 which is your notes at page 23. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 A: Yes, sir? 17 Q: We're still in September 5th from 18 what I can tell and at the top it says: 19 "18:15 meeting with Unit Commanders. 20 Nothing new except helicopter during 21 aerial patrol with Constables Evans and 22 Speck." 23 Correct? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Okay. Now, I want to take you to the


1 typed scribe notes first at Tab 6, at page 41 which is 2 again Inquiry Document Number 1002419, Exhibit Number P- 3 426. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 A: Yes, sir? 8 Q: And if you look at the timing along 9 the side you'll see it goes from 17:02, 17:08, 17:27, 10 16:07? 11 A: I'd say it's a typo. 12 Q: Yes, we've heard evidence that it's a 13 typo -- 14 A: Okay. 15 Q: -- and that the actual meeting was at 16 6:07 p.m. that day. 17 A: Should it be 18:07? 18 Q: Yeah, 18:07. And then if you 19 compare, if you look at the scribe notes from that point, 20 going on for the next two and a half (2 1/2) -- two (2) 21 pages or so, so up to 43 you'll see that it appears to be 22 the minutes of the -- of that meeting and it seems to 23 correlate with the 6:15 meeting that you have noted in 24 your notes. 25 Would you like to review them or would you


1 like to take my word for it? 2 A: Oh, no, it seems to correspond. 3 They're within a few minutes of each other, yes. 4 Q: I'm going to take you now to Tab 7 5 and I'll ask you to turn to page 450. This is Inquiry 6 Document Number 1000152 Exhibit P-427. 7 Now, as we understand it, sir, the typed 8 scribe notes are -- are in this case the result of 9 handwritten scribe notes at the -- as well. 10 A: Whose are these notes? 11 Q: These are the handwritten scribe 12 notes. So this is what gets translated into the typed 13 scribe notes as we understand it with some exceptions 14 here and there. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Okay. And I'm taking you to the 17 handwritten scribe notes because there's a line that I 18 want to take you to that's not in the typed scribe notes. 19 And you can take my word for it that we're in that 20 meeting again at 6:15 on September 5th. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And if you look at the middle of the 23 page: 24 "JOHN CARSON:..." 25 In the middle of the paragraph:


1 "...Heat from political side. Made 2 strong house -- made strong comments in 3 the House." 4 A: That appears to be what it says, yes. 5 Q: Pardon me, sir, I didn't hear your 6 answer. 7 A: I said it appears to be what it says, 8 yes. 9 Q: Okay. I'm going to hand you a 10 document as well just so you know. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 Q: What I'm handing up to you is an 15 excerpt from Ed Vervoort's notes which has been marked as 16 Exhibit P-1008 and is a page from Inquiry Document Number 17 1007879. 18 And the information we have is that Ed 19 Vervoort was attending this meeting and you'll notice 20 that the information seems to correlate with the 21 information from this meeting. 22 Can you take my word for that, sir? 23 A: That's the same time and date, that's 24 for sure. 25 Q: If I take you to the last line right


1 before September 6th. 2 A: Yes? 3 Q: "Lots of political pressure. Strong 4 in-house comments by Premier/Sol Gen." 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: Does that assist you with -- do these 7 two (2) excerpts that I've taken you to assist you with 8 recollecting those comments in the meeting? 9 A: I'm sure they were made. 10 Q: So you're willing to adopt them? 11 A: Sure, I can't dispute them. 12 Q: And this information would now have 13 been added to the information you have about the 14 operation, correct? 15 A: It's information that's out there, 16 yes. 17 Q: And all of the information that I've 18 taken you to so far, this is all -- this would all be 19 added to the things you're thinking about during the 20 course of the operation, correct? 21 A: To be honest, no sir, I wouldn't. 22 Q: But, it's part of the information 23 that you're aware of though? 24 A: It's information that's out there, 25 yes sir.


1 Q: Okay. Given the four (4) or five (5) 2 excerpts I've taken you to, are you aware -- did you -- 3 have you ever been involved in any other operation where 4 this kind of information was shared with you? 5 A: About the politics and stuff? 6 Q: Yes, sir. 7 A: Aylmer Meat Packers was my last 8 investigation just before I retired. 9 Q: When was that sir? 10 A: 90 -- no, sorry, 2003 -- no, 11 2004/2005. 12 Q: And what kind of information were you 13 given? 14 A: About the politics of -- 15 Q: Yes, sir? 16 A: Well it was the Premier knew about 17 the investigation because it had a resound effect on the 18 citizens of Ontario with the bad meat being distributed 19 throughout Ontario in meat stores. So that was a 20 concern. It was also a concern for the Federal 21 Government through the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, 22 as well. 23 Q: You'd agree with me, though, that 24 that kind of information is different than the 25 information I just read to you:


1 "Heat from the political side and lots 2 of in-house pressure [though]." 3 Correct? 4 A: Yes, sir. 5 Q: Okay. Now, if I could take you back 6 to your notes at Tab 3? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: And take you to page 27, we're now on 9 September the 6th. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And you've got a note at 14:30: 15 "Meeting of Unit Commanders." 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: "ERT want feasibility of cameras on 18 Army Camp Road." 19 Et cetera, correct? 20 A: Correct. 21 Q: If I can take you to the typed scribe 22 notes at Tab 6, pages 62 and 63, which is again Inquiry 23 document 1002419, Exhibit P-426. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And you'll see a briefing at 2:27?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And it appears to correspond with 3 that time, correct? 4 A: With my notes, yes it does. 5 Q: And if you look at the bottom of the 6 page, at page 62, "Mark Wright." 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: "There will be a leg time." 9 That's been corrected to lag time. 10 "Concerns raised that the longer it 11 goes more may be around." 12 Feel free to read that paragraph if you'd 13 like, sir. Does that assist with your recollection as to 14 whether or not that statement was made at that meeting? 15 A: Well, I'm sure it was if it's in the 16 meeting notes. 17 Q: Can you assist us with -- you don't 18 take issue with that statement? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Can you assist us with the source of 21 that information? 22 A: Now, which part? The bottom part? 23 Q: "The concerns raised that the longer 24 it goes more may be around." 25 And to be clear, sir, I'm not asking for


1 you to speculate. I'm just asking if you have a 2 recollection as to who was the source of that 3 information? 4 A: Well, Mark Wright mentioned it, but I 5 -- and Ed Vervoort was there. 6 Q: Hmm hmm. 7 A: I don't know who raised the concerns, 8 no. 9 Q: And this would have been added to the 10 information that you were now aware of with respect to 11 the operation at this time? 12 A: That would be out there, yes sir. 13 Q: If I can move ahead now to later in 14 the evening on September the 6th. And I just want to 15 clarify one thing first. If I could go back to your 16 notes at Tab 3 -- 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: -- Exhibit P-1671, and take you to 19 page 30. 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: You've got a note at 20:10: 22 "Constable Martin advised a lone male 23 in the entrance building, obviously 24 hiding and keeps peeking out window." 25 Correct, sir?


1 A: Yes, it does. 2 Q: Now, as I recall your evidence, you 3 said that Chris Martin told that to you. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Okay. The reason why I'm asking you 6 about this, is we've had evidence at the Inquiry that 7 this evi -- that Chris Martin had a conversation with 8 Stan Korosec, and for My Friends' reference that's been 9 marked as Exhibit P-1319. 10 A: Hmm hmm. 11 Q: So I'm trying to see, sir, whether or 12 not you actually spoke with Chris Martin, or if you may 13 have gotten this information instead from Stan Korosec? 14 A: I believe I spoke with Constable 15 Martin. 16 Q: Okay. Could Exhibit P-1319 please be 17 put before the witness? 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Some of 22 these exhibits are not kept out here anymore. They're 23 locked away unless we know in advance that we're going to 24 need them. 25 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: I apologize for


1 that, Mr. Commissioner 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 3 That's why we have to go in the back and get it out. 4 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: And unfortunately, 5 I only have the one copy, so. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Our 7 Registrar here was carrying all the boxes in and out 8 every day, and we suggested to him that he should only 9 keep the most recent ones and in the event that we need 10 something, we'll have to go and get it. That will take a 11 couple of minutes but we'll have to wait. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: What you should have 16 before you is -- is been marked as Exhibit P-1319, 17 Inquiry Document Number 1001992. 18 And I apologize, Mr. Commissioner, that I 19 don't have a copy for you. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: But I don't think 22 this will take very long. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER:


1 Q: You'll notice that the time that's 2 been marked at the top is 20:05? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And because this is a telephone call 5 we understand that we add seven (7) minutes to it, so 6 this phone call actually occurred at 20:12. 7 A: Okay. 8 Q: Okay? And if you want to have a look 9 at this transcript, it's a transcript of a conversation 10 between Mr. Archibald, Mr. Martin and Mr. Korosec, about 11 the issue of the kiosk. 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: And we don't see your name here. 14 A: No. But that doesn't mean that he 15 didn't call me also. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: Excuse me, Commissioner, just a 20 moment. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: Can you have a look, sir, in the 25 typed scribe notes, it's Tab 6, Inquiry Document Number


1 1002419 -- 2 A: Okay. 3 Q: -- Exhibit P-426, and see if you have 4 page 74. Do you have it, sir? 5 A: Yes, I do. 6 Q: At the top at 20:14 hours. 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: "Stan Korosec reports one (1) person 9 in kiosk and closed blinds." 10 There's no mention of you, sir. 11 A: 20:29. 12 Q: Yes, but you have your time mentioned 13 at 20:10; this is the point I'm making. 14 A: Well, that's when -- okay, but that's 15 when I believe he -- we talked. He may have -- obviously 16 he spoke to Stan Korosec too. 17 Q: Hmm hmm. 18 A: But I believe, in my recollection, 19 that Chris Martin also called me. 20 Q: Okay. 21 A: Or I know that he called me. 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: But he may have also called Stan as 24 well. 25 Q: Okay. Now, the other question I have


1 is the use of the phrase, "hiding," because I didn't see 2 that in the transcript that I gave you as Exhibit P-1319. 3 So I'm trying to determine, is that a conclusion you made 4 or was that something that Chris Martin told you? 5 A: I believe that's what he told me. 6 Q: Okay. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: I'm sure My Friends will correct me 11 if I'm wrong, but when Chris Martin was here I don't 12 recall him mentioning speaking to you. 13 MS. KAREN JONES: Well, Mr. Commissioner, 14 I guess the question is: Was he ever asked? 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 16 know, I have no idea. I mean do you have something to 17 support the reference that we can...? 18 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: No, it's the -- 19 it's unfortunately my memory that I'm running on, so I 20 can move on from this point. 21 THE WITNESS: But I also, in my notes, if 22 you turn to page 31, I'm also talking to him at 20:50. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: 25 Q: Hmm hmm. The time is what I am


1 focussing on, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 3 THE WITNESS: Well, okay. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: 6 Q: So the 20:10 is what I'm focussing 7 on. I'm not -- 8 A: Okay. 9 Q: -- focussing on post that. 10 A: My watch could have been out or the 11 time of the call could have been out. 12 Q: Or it's possible that Korosec -- you 13 may not have spoken to him, Korosec may have provided you 14 that information? 15 A: I -- I believe I was talking to Chris 16 Martin. 17 Q: Okay. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, going back to your notes at page 22 30 -- 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: -- it appears that you were in the -- 25 well, I guess would -- would you have been in the TOC and


1 the -- or the detachment between 20:00 hours and 20:30? 2 A: I would -- the TOC is -- the Command 3 Centre wasn't in the TOC, the TOC was the one that was 4 down at the -- 5 Q: Sorry, you're correct. 6 A: East Parkway. 7 Q: Thank you for correcting me. And at 8 the Command Centre -- 9 A: The Command Centre -- 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: -- or the detachment? I was probably 12 in between both, actually, that night -- 13 Q: All right. 14 A: -- back and forth. 15 Q: But the ERT was -- the ERT teams were 16 not something that you were responsible for, correct? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: So when you say at 20:30 teams were 19 being prepared, you have no idea what may have been 20 happening before that point, just that somebody told you 21 at 20:30 the teams were being prepared? 22 A: That's correct. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 Q: Finally, sir, if I can take you to 2 Tab 12, which is the electronic disclosure of your notes 3 from 1996 on, which has been marked as Exhibit P-1677. 4 A: Yes, sir? 5 Q: Now, My Friend Ms. Tuck-Jackson took 6 you to the lines on page 148 where you were informed to 7 no longer assist Mr. Peel with respect to the defence of 8 Ken Deane. Do you recall that? 9 A: Yes, I do. 10 Q: Okay. Now, if I take you to page 11 154, which is May 13th, so it's a few months after the 12 notes on page 148. 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: I note at 15:15 there's a note that 15 says: 16 "Norm Peel advised of notes and photos 17 and archives in Ottawa." 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: So I'm curious, if you were not 20 assisting with the defence of Mr. Deane anymore at this 21 point, why would there be a note in your notes that you 22 advised Mr. Peel of some information? 23 A: Very simple. Mr. Peel is an honorary 24 member of the National Defence, and when he -- when we 25 had the -- operation notes came back and they were


1 blackened out, he had some contacts through his contacts 2 with the DND, and he said that the notes and photographs 3 from Camp Ipperwash were in Ottawa, in the archives in 4 Ottawa, which gave us an idea where they were, and from 5 there we ended up getting them. 6 Q: So you were providing information to 7 Mr. -- you were providing information to Mr. Peel, as 8 well? 9 A: No, he was providing them to us, 10 actually, through his contact. 11 Q: Okay. Now, a question in terms of 12 timing. 13 A: Pardon me? 14 Q: A question in terms of timing. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Now, if I look at your notes, page 17 154 on -- 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: -- it appears that this is where most 20 of your interviews and statements with Members of the 21 Armed Forces and Military Police occurs, or starts at the 22 very least? 23 A: That's correct. 24 Q: Now, if I turn back a page, it would 25 appear that all of those statements were post the


1 conviction of Mr. Deane, correct? 2 A: That's right. 3 Q: And you've already said that these 4 statements were taken several years after 1995, so it 5 would be two (2) to four (4) years, correct? 6 A: Well, over two (2) years for sure, 7 yes. 8 Q: And it was based on memory, correct? 9 A: What was? 10 Q: The statements. 11 A: On memory of the Military Police? 12 Q: Yes. 13 A: And plus their -- any notes that they 14 had, they keep notes as well. 15 Q: Did you see any notes? 16 A: The odd person had their notebook 17 with them. 18 Q: One (1) person had their notebook? 19 A: I said the odd person. 20 Q: The odd person? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: So that's not something that most 23 people had? 24 A: Well, most of them had the notes. 25 Q: Well, you said the odd person?


1 A: Yes, that I recall. 2 Q: Okay. 3 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Thank you 4 Detective Sergeant Richardson. No further questions. 5 A: Thank you, sir. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 7 Mr. Alexander. 8 Yes, Mr. Rosenthal...? 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Good afternoon, Mr. 13 Commissioner. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 15 afternoon, sir. 16 17 CROSS-EXAMINATION MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 18 Q: Good afternoon, Officer. 19 A: Sir. 20 Q: My name is Peter Rosenthal, I'm 21 counsel to some of the Stoney Point people of the name 22 Aazhoodena and George family group. 23 A: Okay. 24 Q: Let me begin by agreeing with Ms. 25 Tuck-Jackson, thank you very much for having such clear


1 handwriting. 2 A: Thank you for the comment. 3 Q: And let me also begin with an apology 4 that I'm going to have to deal just briefly with a bunch 5 of different things, rather than doing it in a more 6 relaxed way, which I might do if we had a little bit more 7 time. 8 A: No problem. 9 Q: So I'm just going to pick a few 10 things from time to time. 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: Let me first begin, if I may, with 13 looking at Tab 6, which is the scribe notes, an excerpt 14 thereof, an excerpt of P-426. If we could look at page 15 63 of that entry. 16 A: Yes, sir. 17 Q: You'll see in the third paragraph on 18 that page: 19 "Trevor Richardson advises told by 20 elders that there is no burial on that 21 part of the land." 22 Now, am I correct, sir, that that's a 23 slight mis-statement of the facts, and you told us today, 24 in fact, that you were told by another Constable that the 25 elders had said that, right?


1 A: That's correct. 2 Q: You didn't have any direct 3 conversations with any elders? 4 A: No, I did not. 5 Q: And you knew at the time about the 6 friction between Kettle Point and Stoney Point, right? 7 A: I didn't -- honestly, sir, I didn't 8 know much of the politics behind the two (2) Reserves, I 9 didn't -- 10 Q: I see. Did you have some idea there 11 was some friction? 12 A: Well, I was learning it as I went. 13 Q: You learned it as you went, yes. 14 A: Absolutely. 15 Q: So as an experienced Officer, that 16 would make you question information that came from Kettle 17 Point about Stoney Point, right? 18 A: It certainly could be a problem. 19 Q: Yes. Thank you. Now, if we could 20 then move, please, to your notes, which are at Tab 3, or 21 Exhibit P-1671. And again, briefly, with respect to page 22 1 of the notes, where you wrote that: 23 "The Provincial Government has told MNR 24 and OPP to do what is necessary." 25 Now I want to fasten on the wording in a


1 more precise way than perhaps has been done here before. 2 "The Provincial Government has told MNR 3 and OPP..." 4 Now, I put it to you that when you wrote 5 that, you would have written it that way because your 6 understanding that some source within the Provincial 7 Government had communicated with MNR and with the OPP, 8 right? 9 A: It appears so, yes, sir. 10 Q: Yes. So and if the Provincial 11 Government had just communicated with MNR, and then MNR 12 had communicated with OPP, you would have written it, 13 Provincial Government told MNR and MNR told OPP that... 14 Right? 15 A: That is probably correct, sir, yes. 16 Q: Thank you. So you got the 17 understanding at that point that in particular, that the 18 Provincial Government was anxious that the OPP do 19 whatever was necessary to prevent the Park from being 20 taken over, right? 21 A: Yes, sir. 22 Q: And then related to that on page 19. 23 And you were taken to this by Mr. Alexander but I wish to 24 correlate it with that in a way different from what he 25 did.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: Page 19 of that same document: 3 "Inspector Carson advises Member of 4 Parliament notified --" 5 Sorry. 6 "A Member of Parliament notified [is 7 number 4]." 8 And also 9 "PM to be notified." 10 Premier to be notified, right? 11 A: Yes, sir. That's what I have. 12 Q: Now, sir -- sorry? 13 A: That's what I have in my notes, yes, 14 sir. 15 Q: Right. Now, you told us that, in 16 response to the questions from Mr. Alexander, that if 17 anybody wants to notify the Premier, that's up to them, 18 it doesn't affect your job. 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: Right? 21 A: Correct. 22 Q: But were you curious as to why 23 Inspector Carson would advise you that the Premier was to 24 be notified? Didn't that seem -- 25 A: Well he didn't advise me, personally.


1 This was a full -- 2 Q: No. He advised the group, yeah. 3 A: -- the whole group. 4 Q: Yes. He advised the group which -- 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: -- included you? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: But didn't you find it odd that the 9 Incident Commander was advising you, in the middle of 10 this operation, that the Premier is to be notified about 11 it. 12 A: I -- I had no concern over that. 13 Q: Didn't find it odd though? 14 A: No, not really. 15 Q: I see. Okay. Thank you. Now later 16 on in the course of these several days of September 4 to 17 6, 1995 -- 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: -- did you get the understanding that 20 the Premier had been displeased about the OPP allowing 21 the Park to be taken over? 22 A: I don't recall hearing that -- 23 Q: You don't recall hearing anything 24 about the displeasure of the Premier at that turn of 25 events?


1 A: No. 2 Q: Okay. Now, Mr. Registrar, may ask 3 for your assistance, please. Thank you. Could you 4 please give one to the Commissioner and one to the 5 witness, thank you. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: What has just been handed to you, 10 sir, is an extract from Exhibit P-1051, it's Tab 23 of 11 that exhibit. And it's a document dated August 28, 1995. 12 And the subject according to the document is, "Procedures 13 dealing with First Nations people." 14 Look at the bottom of the second page of 15 that and you'll see it's signed by a Robert Crawford, a 16 Park Enforcement Group Leader. And I should like to draw 17 your attention to several aspects of that and ask if you 18 were aware about -- of this at the time, given your role 19 in investigating possible criminal activity. 20 Now, in the first paragraph there numbered 21 Number 1, reads: 22 "First Nations person in contravention 23 of a law." 24 And continues: 25 "Park Warden's ought to be the eyes and


1 ears for the OPP when a First Nations 2 person has contravened the law. Park 3 Warden shall contact the OPP 4 immediately [and so on]." 5 Now, sir, were you aware, either of the 6 existence of this document or at least the notion behind 7 this document? 8 A: Never seen the document before, sir. 9 Q: Never saw the document? 10 A: No, sir. 11 Q: Were you aware that Park wardens had 12 been advised that they were to be the eyes and ears for 13 the OPP with respect to First Nations persons 14 contravening the law? 15 A: Well, I was stationed in Chatham at 16 this time, certainly, and -- 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: -- I'm sure Forest Detachment was -- 19 was probably given to us, but I never seen it. 20 Q: You never saw the document and you 21 never became aware that there was some special 22 arrangement with Park wardens with respect to reporting 23 any possible contraventions of the law by First Nations 24 people? 25 A: No, sir.


1 Q: And you were the person in charge of 2 the criminal investigations for the OPP from the time you 3 arrived on August 30th and through -- 4 A: I didn't arrived 'til September 4th. 5 Q: Sorry, September 4th. And when you 6 arrived September 4, you were not made aware of this at 7 all? 8 A: No. Plus there was no wardens or any 9 MNR people around at all, except Les Kobayashi. 10 Q: Okay. Thank you. 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: Now, if you could just turn quickly 13 to Tab 10, please, of your document brief, which is 14 Exhibit P-457, page 3 thereof. At the top there's an 15 indication that you had some concerns about roadblocks 16 and you were asked about this. I just wanted to clarify 17 it a bit further. 18 A: Yes, sir. 19 Q: Did I understand correctly, sir, that 20 your evidence is that up until September 6, up to and 21 including the evening of September 6th, the roadblocks 22 were working reasonably effectively, but then afterwards, 23 September 7, 8, 9, they -- the people doing the 24 roadblocks were not doing as thorough a job as you 25 thought should be done?


1 A: In my opinion, yes, sir, that's 2 correct. 3 Q: I see. But it was well done until, 4 say, at least that night? 5 A: It was half decently done, yes. 6 Q: Sorry? 7 A: It was half decently done prior to 8 that, yes. 9 Q: Prior to -- prior to, say, up to and 10 including the killing of Dudley George, the roadblocks 11 were doing their job reasonably well? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: Thank you. Now then, if you could 14 turn back to Tab 3, please, which are your notes, P-1671. 15 It's so nice when that goes off and it's quiet in here. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Then people have to 18 hear my voice more fully, which is an unfortunate 19 corollary event. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 22 Q: If you turn to page 3, please, of 23 your notes. 24 A: Yes, sir? 25 Q: There are the two (2) subsections, as


1 you've indicated, with respect to possible charges that 2 might be laid, one (1) entitled, After Court Order, and 3 one (1), Prior to Court Order, right? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: So at this time... 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Sir, sorry, but just going back to an 10 answer you gave me a few minutes ago, I had suggested to 11 you that you would have become aware of that document 12 about the special policing of First Nations people on 13 August 30th, and you explained you didn't go there 'til 14 September 4th. 15 But I was correct that August 30th began 16 your involvement with this situation, right? 17 A: Yes. That's when I first became the 18 -- assigned as the primary investigator. 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And so you -- and you were a primary 22 investigator for criminal activities that might have been 23 being committed in relation to Ipperwash, right? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And but even though you were given


1 that responsibility on August 30th, you didn't know about 2 that document from two (2) days earlier? 3 A: No, sir, I did not. 4 Q: Okay. Thank you. Now, going then 5 to page 3, this is on August 30th as well; is that 6 correct? 7 A: Yes, it is. 8 Q: So as you began your involvement with 9 Ipperwash, I gather you were instructed to consider what 10 charges might be laid prior to a court author -- order, 11 and what charges might be laid subsequent to a court 12 order, right? 13 A: That's correct. 14 Q: And you explained that the court 15 order you had in mind was an injunction? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: So at that point, at least, there was 18 obviously consideration of charging people prior to there 19 being any injunction, as well as subsequent to there 20 being an injunction, right? 21 A: That's an option, yes, sir. 22 Q: I'm sorry? 23 A: There was option there, yes. 24 Q: Yes. So at that point, you certainly 25 did not get an understanding that the OPP would wait


1 until there was an injunction before anyone were charged 2 for being the Park, right? 3 A: To my understanding that if somebody 4 entered the Park they were going to do some charging. 5 Q: They'd be charged even if there had 6 been no injunction in place? 7 A: That's correct. 8 Q: Yes. And they would have been 9 charged, for example, with trespass? 10 A: Yes, which would have been a summons 11 and -- 12 Q: Trespass to property or also as you 13 indicated on this page, if they failed to obey an 14 Officer's Orders presumably they might be charged with 15 obstructing a police officer in the execution of his 16 duty? 17 A: That's correct. 18 Q: And that's a more serious charge than 19 trespassing, that's a criminal offence as opposed to the 20 Provincial offence of trespassing? 21 A: That's true. 22 Q: Now, I gather that Incident Commander 23 Carson would have been aware of your investigating those 24 possibilities and coming to those conclusions that those 25 were possible charges, right?


1 A: As a result of the meeting the day 2 before I was instructed to do this so I'm sure he knew 3 that I was doing that. 4 Q: Yes. Now, going then to the evening 5 of September 6 and the damage to the car that you've been 6 asked about, that was a criminal -- possible criminal 7 charge that you would have been then in charge of 8 obtaining evidence at that point, right? 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: And of course we now know that 11 Officer Sam Poole was getting a statement from the 12 alleged victim of that crime, if it was. 13 When did you first know that a statement 14 was being taken from the victim? 15 A: Well, that would be around 8:00 or in 16 that area. 17 Q: Around 8:00 you were aware that there 18 was this alleged offence that had been committed and that 19 one (1) of your Officers was taking a statement from the 20 victim? 21 A: Sam Poole was one (1) of the 22 checkpoint Officers. 23 Q: Yes. And are you aware specifically 24 that he was the one (1) taking the statement, as well? 25 A: That was in my notes, yes sir.


1 Q: I see. 2 A: Page 30. 3 Q: And did you then speak with Officer 4 Poole to find out the essence of the statement that he 5 had been taking? 6 A: No, I had -- I had Mark Dew go down 7 to help Sam Poole. 8 Q: I see. Now, were you aware at around 9 8:00 that evening that there were two different versions 10 of what happened to this car floating around police 11 circles, shall we say? 12 A: Well certainly initially I heard it 13 was bat, a bat that -- 14 Q: Yes -- 15 A: -- hit the car. And then 16 subsequently I found out that it was rock. 17 Q: Right and that would have been 18 sometime around 8:00, 8:30 that evening? 19 A: Yes, sir in that area. 20 Q: You would have been aware that there 21 were the two (2) different versions? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And you were aware that Officer Sam 24 Poole would be the person who would presumably know the 25 correct version or at least the victim's --


1 A: Version of it. 2 Q: -- version of the correct version, 3 right? 4 A: Yes,sir. 5 Q: Now, we've had some evidence 6 suggesting that one (1) of the main reasons that the 7 Crowd Management Unit marched down the road that night 8 was because of the information that a person who was 9 uninvolved -- just a member of the public had had her car 10 attacked by First Nations people with baseball bats? 11 You're aware of that playing a role in 12 the marching down the road, sir? 13 A: I'm not aware of that particular 14 incident. I was only understanding that there was the 15 one (1) vehicle hit. 16 Q: Yes, no, no -- 17 A: To me. 18 Q: Yes -- no we are also of the 19 understanding there was only one (1) vehicle incident, 20 sir. But, we are of the understanding that there were 21 two (2) different versions of that incident that were 22 current among police officers that evening, okay? 23 And then you had that understanding at 24 some point, as well, you told us. That the one (1) 25 version involving baseball bats and one (1) version


1 involving a rock, right? 2 A: Well, I took it as the one (1) 3 version initially that was a bat, turned out to be a 4 rock. That's what I took it as. 5 Q: Okay. Sure. Okay. So you took it 6 that the initial information was that it was a bat and 7 that turned out to be incorrect and in fact the better 8 information was that it was a rock? 9 A: That's the only information I had, 10 yes. 11 Q: Yes. 12 A: That was the information I had. 13 Q: But at least in some quarters 14 apparently, the bat version continued for -- until later 15 in the evening. 16 A: It may have. 17 Q: Yes. And in fact we get the 18 understanding that the bat version was at least a 19 component in the decision to march down the road that 20 night. 21 Were you aware of that before I've just 22 told you that now, sir? 23 A: I -- that would be up to Inspector 24 Carson -- 25 Q: Yes.


1 A: -- that night or Inspector Linton. 2 Q: Yes. So you wouldn't make the 3 decision as to march down the road. 4 A: Yeah. And I don't know all their 5 information either. 6 Q: And you weren't aware though that the 7 bat version played a role in that decision? 8 A: No, sir, I did not. 9 Q: Thank you. Now could we please look 10 at Tab 8 of your document brief. This has been made 11 Exhibit P-1674 and it's a transcript of a tape recording 12 of a phone call which you were one (1) of the 13 participants. 14 A: Yes, sir. 15 Q: And apparently we're to add seven (7) 16 minutes to the time recorded there so and coming to the 17 conclusion that this was about 21:06. In other words, 18 it's a little bit after nine o'clock on the evening of 19 September 6, right? 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: So this would have been the after -- 22 the incident with the car however described had occurred 23 and after you had gotten a corrected version of the 24 incident, an updated version, that it was with a rock 25 rather than a bat, right?


1 A: Yes, it would have been. 2 Q: Now if you turn to the second page of 3 that, you report: 4 "Shit has hit the fan." 5 Right? 6 A: Yes, sir. 7 Q: Now by that you meant that something 8 serious was going to happen that evening, right? 9 A: That we were... 10 Q: Is that a fair conclusion that you 11 meant to imply at least that? 12 A: Yes. That something was occurring, 13 yeah. 14 Q: Yes. Well it was in the -- it was 15 either -- was in the process of occurring, it was likely 16 to occur soon, right? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Something serious. And you didn't 19 mean a rock hitting a car. 20 You meant something more serious than 21 that? 22 A: Well I -- I knew what it was. They 23 did not. 24 Q: Right 25 A: I knew our officers were going to go


1 down there and -- and have the people that were on the 2 sand lot move. 3 Q: Okay. So you knew by this time but 4 you -- quite properly it would appear and felt that you 5 shouldn't communicate that to anyone unless you were 6 authorized to do so. 7 But you knew by this time that the Crowd 8 Management Unit was going to march down East Parkway 9 Drive to the Park and going to at least insist that any 10 people in the sandy parking lot go back to the Park, 11 correct? 12 A: Yeah. And they also knew it too, the 13 radio room. 14 Q: The radio people knew that too. 15 A: Well like -- because they said right 16 here just the one (1) above me says: 17 "All we know is that people are 18 moving." 19 So they -- 20 Q: I see. 21 A: -- they realized that the -- they can 22 hear it too -- 23 Q: You -- you took, "the people are 24 moving" meaning -- 25 A: The ERT team.


1 Q: CM -- the ERT team or CMU -- 2 A: Yes, sir. 3 Q: -- are moving and -- but you knew 4 more fully perhaps than they did that they would be 5 moving down the road towards the sandy parking lot? 6 A: Correct. 7 Q: And did you have any indication, sir, 8 as to when that decision was made? It was obviously be 9 then before 9:00 or 6:00 p.m. when you knew about the 10 decision. But was it just before then or was it -- 11 A: I know they were -- if I go to my 12 notes here -- 13 Q: Yes, thank you. 14 A: About 8:30 the teams were being 15 prepared. 16 Q: Yes. 17 A: And then, so I guess I knew then that 18 they were probably going to be going down there. 19 Q: I see. 20 A: Or shortly after that. 21 Q: Yes. So by around 8:30 ERT team 22 members were getting prepared to go to the vicinity of 23 the Park at least, to the TOC at least and so on and you 24 had the understanding that sometime that evening they 25 would likely be marching down East Parkway Drive --


1 A: Certainly they were -- 2 Q: Sorry? 3 A: -- they were going to be ready for it 4 I guess and if they decide to go, they would be ready to 5 go. 6 Q: Yeah. But you -- 7 A: That would be up -- that would be up 8 to Inspector Carson of course. 9 Q: Right. But you had the understanding 10 they were likely going to go and that's why you said, 11 "The shit's going to hit the fan." Or -- or "The shit 12 has hit the fan." in fact, right? 13 A: That would -- that would be my 14 interpretation, yes. 15 Q: Yes. Now, if we could look at Tab 3 16 of your notes again. 17 A: Yes, sir? 18 Q: Page 30 of that, please? 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 A: Yes, sir? 23 Q: At 20:00 there's a note: 24 "Updated Detective Constable Dew." 25 And then that includes:


1 "Constable Sam Poole taking a 2 statement." 3 And then in spite of your excellent 4 handwriting I can't quite make out the -- what you wrote 5 just below that: 6 "Discussion held re. --" 7 A: "Taking property again by ERT." 8 Q: "By ERT, et cetera." 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: So did you by that mean -- in other 11 words ERT re-taking the sandy parking lot? 12 A: Well, if they had picnic tables or 13 something out there again like they did -- 14 Q: I -- 15 A: -- earlier in the morning. 16 Q: I see. But so: 17 "Discussion held re: taking property 18 again by ERT, et cetera." 19 Is at 8:00 p.m.? 20 A: With Mark Dew. 21 Q: With Mark Dew? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: I see. So you -- that was just the 24 two (2) of you as far as you recollect? 25 A: Yes, sir.


1 Q: And you discussed the possibility 2 that ERT might have to that evening re-take picnic tables 3 like they had earlier that day? 4 A: Yes, sir. 5 Q: So then I would put it to you it 6 appeared that it was at least contemplated by this time 7 by you and Officer Dew that the ERT team members would be 8 somehow engaging the people in and near the Park, right? 9 A: They may be, yes, sir. 10 Q: Yes, and -- and you discussed one (1) 11 thing that may happen might be re-taking of picnic 12 tables? 13 A: They -- they have some illicit 14 property or whatever, yes, sir. 15 Q: Now, moving through much activity the 16 incidents of September 6 evening take place and then I'd 17 like to go to the hospital. 18 A: Okay. 19 Q: Or the -- at least the -- to move to 20 the hospital. 21 Now, you told us that you were advised by 22 Officer Wright that you should make the arrests of those 23 persons, right? 24 A: Yes, sir. 25 Q: And if I heard you correctly in


1 answer to questions from Ms. Vella this morning you 2 indicated the reasons for arrest included as you 3 understood them the combination of gunfire, the car 4 trying to run over people, and you understood that 5 Officer Wright had conferred with the Crown about such 6 possible charges. 7 Did I understand you correctly, sir? 8 A: Yes, sir. 9 Q: And also you added the 10 information that Officer Wright had told you that the car 11 had run a checkpoint or something similar to that? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: And -- 14 A: And -- and plus the car and the bus 15 down at the -- down at the sand lot as well. 16 Q: And that this car might well be the 17 car that was involved in the incident -- 18 A: That's right. 19 Q: -- in the sandy parking lot or near 20 the sandy parking lot? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: Now, sir, the information that I've 23 just reminded you of with respect to your evidence 24 earlier today, that's not reflected in your notes at all 25 is it, any of those details?


1 A: No. 2 Q: And I might have missed it in spite 3 of your good handwriting but it's not, right? 4 A: No, it's not in my notes; that's 5 correct. 6 Q: Nothing about what the reasons were: 7 a combination of a car trying to run over people, a 8 combination of gunfire -- 9 A: No. 10 Q: -- confirming with the Crown, running 11 the checkpoint or a car similar being involved. None 12 of -- 13 A: No. 14 Q: -- that's in your notes, right? 15 A: No, it's not. 16 Q: And, sir, I would put it to you that 17 you might be mis-remembering because if you look at Tab 18 13... 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: ...of the -- your document brief 23 which is P-1678 in this proceeding, if you look at pages 24 9 and 10 of that. The "9" being the small numbering at 25 the bottom rather than the large -- larger numbers, in


1 two (2) senses, at the top, if you look about two-thirds 2 (2/3's) of the way down page 9 -- well, before that: 3 "ARMSTRONG: These people that were 4 arrested from the vehicle." 5 And the vehicle meaning the vehicle that 6 arrived at the hospital with Dudley George that evening, 7 sir. 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: "What were they arrested for? 10 RICHARDSON: Attempt murder. 11 ARMSTRONG: How did you receive 12 information that those people were to 13 be arrested for that? 14 RICHARDSON: I was advised that 15 everyone that came off the Park and 16 the Stoney Point reservation were to 17 be arrested for attempt murder on our 18 Officers. 19 ARMSTRONG: And who did you receive 20 that information from? 21 RICHARDSON: Detective Sergeant Mark 22 Wright." 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: I would put it to you sir, that your 25 evidence in this statement of several years ago was more


1 accurate and of course, people do forget as time goes on, 2 but was more accurate than the details that you suggested 3 today? 4 A: No, sir. The details I'm giving now 5 are the details that happened on September 6th. 6 Q: Well, was it false then that you were 7 advised that everyone that came off the Park and the 8 Stoney Point Reservation were to be arrested for attempt 9 murder on our Officers or perhaps -- sorry -- perhaps we 10 can reconcile the two (2), in the sense that you were 11 advised of that, as you indicated in your statement, but 12 also you recollect some additional details of these 13 particular people? 14 A: Well the details that I'm giving 15 today, Officer Armstrong during that Coroner's 16 investigation statement didn't say what were your grounds 17 to arrest -- 18 Q: Right -- 19 A: -- he just said, who are you to 20 arrest and we said -- I said everyone that came off the 21 Stoney Point Reserve. 22 Q: Well he -- 23 A: He didn't ask me for the grounds like 24 you have. 25 Q: Well, with respect sir, he -- the


1 question is at the bottom of page 9: 2 "How did you receive information that 3 those people were to be arrested for 4 that?" 5 Meaning attempted murder. 6 And you answered: 7 "I was advised that everyone that came 8 off the Park and the Stoney Point 9 Reservation were to be arrested for 10 attempt murder on our Officers." 11 Now, was that true? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: Okay. So in addition to any 14 particular details about these people, you were in fact 15 advised that everyone that came off the Park and the 16 Stoney Point Reservation was to be arrested for attempt 17 murder on our Officers, right? 18 A: Yes, sir. 19 Q: So these people whatever else -- 20 whatever other details, they certainly had come off the 21 Stoney Point Reservation, right? 22 A: Yeah, along with the details I just 23 gave today. 24 Q: Yes. 25 A: Correct.


1 Q: But, you didn't need those other 2 details to make the arrest according to what you'd been 3 told by Mark Wright? 4 A: I needed these details, yes I did. 5 Just because they come off the Stoney Point Reserve 6 doesn't mean they had to get arrested. 7 Q: Well, sorry am I misunderstanding you 8 stating -- 9 A: Sir -- 10 Q: "I was advised that everyone that 11 came off the Park and the Stoney Point 12 Reservation were to be arrested for 13 attempt murder on our Officers." 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: That means everyone whether they're 16 in a car or not, right? 17 A: Yes. And -- 18 Q: And to clarify -- 19 A: - and okay -- but he never asked me 20 and you can go through the whole document -- 21 Q: Yes -- 22 A: -- he never asked me what our grounds 23 were. If he would have said and what were your grounds 24 to arrest everybody that came off the Reserve, then I 25 would have said, this is the grounds.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: All right. 3 Q: And so I'll ask you then. 4 A: Yes -- 5 Q: What were your grounds to arrest 6 everybody who came off the reserve? 7 A: To the point where there was gunshot 8 at our Officers. 9 Q: Right. 10 A: Car came out after them, bus came out 11 after them, tried to run them over. And in particular, 12 this white car, could have been the car down at the 13 sandlot and ran the road check, almost hit one (1) of our 14 Officers -- 15 Q: Okay -- 16 A: -- and came to the hospital. 17 Q: Okay. Suppose somebody just walked 18 off the Reserve? What would have been your grounds for 19 arresting that person for attempt murder, sir? 20 A: I wouldn't have been there, so I 21 don't know. 22 Q: You were advised to -- 23 A: There was people that did walk off 24 the Reserve and came and asked for -- 25 Q: Yes --


1 A: -- ambulance and stuff that were not 2 arrested so. 3 Q: Now you told me a few minutes ago, 4 sir -- 5 A: Yes -- 6 Q: -- to be fair, that Mr. Armstrong in 7 interviewing you didn't ask what your grounds would have 8 been for the general arrest possibility that you 9 mentioned there. 10 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And I'm now asking you that I'm 13 inquiring about that. 14 And I'm suggesting, I'm asking you -- if 15 someone walked off the Reserve no car, but they were then 16 someone who came off the Stoney Point Reservation, they 17 were to be arrested for attempt murder on your Officers, 18 what would your grounds have been? 19 One (1) that there was -- 20 A: Just grounds I gave you. 21 Q: -- an interaction with a car and a 22 bus, right? 23 A: Right. 24 Q: What else would your grounds have 25 been for somebody walking off the Reserve?


1 A: Probably wouldn't have been any. 2 Q: Wouldn't have been any others than 3 that, right? 4 A: No. 5 Q: And you were prepared though, to make 6 an arrest just based on that one (1) ground, correct? 7 A: No, sir, no. 8 Q: I see. 9 A: No, sir I wasn't. 10 Q: So you would not have followed this 11 instruction from Mark Wright? 12 A: That was just part of the instruction 13 though, right? 14 Q: Sir, it says clearly: 15 "I was advised that everyone that came 16 off the Park and the Stoney Point 17 Reservation were to be arrested for 18 attempt murder on our Officers." 19 Was there any limitation to that? 20 A: Well, I would put a limitation on 21 that. 22 Q: You would put a limitation? You 23 wouldn't follow such an instruction? 24 A: Not -- not just that, no. 25 Q: Yes. Because --


1 A: I would not. 2 Q: Because you know that it's -- you 3 don't have reasonable probable grounds to arrest some one 4 just because they were at a scene where there are many, 5 many other people and there may have been a crime 6 committed, right? 7 A: That's correct. 8 Q: You can't make an arrest based on 9 that, right? 10 A: That's -- that's true. 11 Q: And -- but it was true that you were 12 advised that way by Mark Wright or else you wouldn't have 13 told Officer Armstrong that, right? 14 A: Yes. Yes, sir. 15 Q: And when you were advised that by 16 Mark Wright, did you say to him, Hey Mark, I can't just 17 go around arresting everybody who wanders of the 18 Reserve." 19 A: I don't know -- 20 Q: You question that? 21 A: I don't know if I questioned that or 22 not. 23 Q: I see. Now, in fact, going to the 24 hospital situation then, sir. 25 A: Yes, sir.


1 Q: There was a car at the hospital 2 shortly, right? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: It was a white car; is that correct? 5 A: Yes, it is. 6 Q: Were you advised that the car 7 involved in the incident was not a white car? 8 A: The one at the sand lot? 9 Q: The one in the sandy parking lot was 10 not white. It was a darker colour. 11 A: I don't think we were given a colour 12 at that time. 13 Q: You weren't given a colour at that 14 time? 15 A: No, sir. 16 Q: You were following this car to the 17 hospital, right? 18 A: Yeah, a short distance, yeah. 19 Q: Shortly -- a short distance at the 20 end. You were looking for it prior to that -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- and couldn't find it. 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: At the end you followed it a short 25 distance.


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And as you were following it, you 3 would determine you were going to arrest the occupants of 4 that car, right? 5 A: Yes, sir. 6 Q: And it was a white car. 7 A: Yes, it was. 8 Q: Now, sir, at least in retrospect, 9 wouldn't it have been appropriate for you to get on your 10 radio and try and determine if any officers knew the 11 colour of the car involved in the incident, before you 12 would arrest people for driving that car to the hospital? 13 A: Well to be honest, sir, we didn't 14 have a radio in our car. 15 Q: Didn't have a radio in your car? 16 A: No, sir. 17 Q: I see. Well you were looking for a 18 white car though -- 19 A: Yep. 20 Q: -- for -- for perhaps a half an hour 21 or so before you finally saw it close to the hospital, 22 right? 23 A: Pretty close to that, yes, sir. 24 Q: And it never occurred to you to check 25 if a white car was the car involved?


1 A: No, sir, it did not. 2 Q: In retrospect, at least, you'd agree 3 that would have been appropriate? 4 A: Absolutely. 5 Q: And even if it had been a white car, 6 would you feel, sir, that you would have had reasonable 7 and probable grounds to arrest anyone who had driven out 8 of the Army Camp, say, in a white car that evening? 9 A: I'd say -- I would say, yes, at that 10 time. Yes, sir. 11 Q: You would? That would be enough? 12 The -- the fact of coming from the Camp itself would not 13 be enough but coming in a white car would be enough? 14 That's where you would draw the line on 15 reasonable and probable grounds? 16 A: Well the -- I think that -- the 17 circumstances that the -- this white car ran the 18 roadblock, to me -- 19 Q: Well I -- but -- 20 A: Okay. But just a regular white car 21 coming off the -- 22 Q: Yes. 23 A: No, I wouldn't. I don't think so. 24 Q: No. Now you -- you didn't write in 25 your notes that this car had run a roadblock, according


1 to any information you received, correct? 2 A: No, I did not. 3 Q: And may I perhaps refresh your 4 memory. There was another car whose occupants were 5 apprehended by officers that evening. 6 A: Yes, they were chased down the road. 7 Q: A car driven -- sorry? 8 A: They were chased down the road a bit, 9 yes. 10 Q: A car driven by Marcia Simon? 11 A: I'm not sure who was driving it. 12 Q: Driven by a woman who was seeking to 13 call an ambulance. Do you recall that, sir? 14 A: Yes, sir. 15 Q: Yes. And there may have been 16 allegations about that car running a stop sign or 17 something, or perhaps even running a checkpoint. But I 18 would put it to you, there doesn't appear to be evidence 19 about the car that went to the hospital running any 20 checkpoints. 21 So is it possible that, eleven (11) years 22 later, sir, your missing on that one point? 23 A: No, I don't think so. 24 Q: I see. You're quite sure that Mark 25 Wright told you this car had run a checkpoint?


1 A: Yes, sir. 2 Q: Which checkpoint would that have 3 been, sir? 4 A: 21 and Army Camp Road. 5 Q: The one on Army Camp Road, near 6 where? 7 A: 21 Highway. 8 Q: 21 Highway. I see. 9 A: I believe that's the one, yes, sir. 10 Q: Right at the Army Camp, in other 11 words? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: And your information was that this 14 car came from the Army Camp, was it? 15 A: Yes, sir. 16 Q: And it ran a checkpoint right away? 17 A: As it come out, yes, sir. 18 Q: And did you get -- you didn't get 19 that information from any officer associated with the 20 checkpoint, right? 21 A: Well, somebody must have called it 22 into Mark Wright. I -- I didn't get it directly from 23 them, no. 24 Q: Any information you got was from Mark 25 Wright?


1 A: Yes, sir. 2 Q: Now you were there when the people in 3 the car were arrested, right? 4 A: Yes, sir. 5 Q: And you indicated that the driver and 6 the passenger who had been sitting next to him, a female 7 person, were yelling in a way that was -- you took as 8 evidence they were obviously upset, right? 9 A: Yes, sir. 10 Q: And I would put it to you that at 11 least one (1) of them would have yelled at one (1) point 12 something about Dudley being their brother. Didn't you 13 get that information at that point, sir? 14 A: They may have, sir, I -- 15 Q: They may have, right? 16 A: I can't recall that. 17 Q: And we were told by Officer Bell that 18 he interviewed the young man who was in the back of the 19 car and was also placed under arrest. You -- you recall 20 that? 21 A: I know the -- I think he was placed 22 under arrest, I -- I don't recall Don Bell telling me 23 that he got anything from him or not. I can't remember. 24 Q: I'm sorry, that he...? 25 A: That he took a statement from him


1 or -- 2 Q: Well, I have some -- 3 A: -- got information from him. 4 Q: -- evidence from Officer Bell as to 5 the conversation he had -- 6 A: Okay. 7 Q: -- with that young man. 8 A: Yeah. Oh, I'm not disputing that. 9 Q: Yes. And that included information 10 that Dudley George was a relative of his. 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: Okay. And that he was not present at 13 the scene of the shooting of Dudley George, in other 14 words where the incident occurred. 15 A: Hmm hmm. 16 Q: Okay? I'm just telling you that's 17 the information of Officer Bell. You may or may not have 18 been aware of that at the time -- 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: -- but we're aware of that because he 21 just testified yesterday. 22 A: Okay. 23 Q: Okay? So would you agree, sir, 24 though, that if he had information and -- and he also 25 said that this young man spoke in a relatively composed


1 way given the circumstances, in his view, okay? 2 A: Okay, yeah. 3 Q: Now, would you agree that if you had 4 that information, that these people weren't -- or if you 5 had some suggestion that these people might not have been 6 even where Dudley George was shot at the time he was 7 shot, that would have given you pause about arresting 8 them for attempted murder, right? 9 A: We'd have to prove their story, yes, 10 sir. 11 Q: Yes. Well,... 12 A: I mean just to say I wasn't there, 13 doesn't mean they weren't. 14 Q: Absolutely. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: But you didn't have the strongest 17 grounds for concluding that they were involved, I would 18 suggest to you, and therefore, if there was a suggestion 19 that they maybe weren't there, you would consider that in 20 the balance when you're determining whether you have 21 reasonable probable grounds, right? 22 A: But it would still be down the road a 23 little bit. You'd have to prove that they weren't there, 24 you know what I mean? 25 Q: Well...


1 A: Well, if they just came out of the 2 car and says, We weren't there -- 3 Q: Yes. 4 A: -- well -- 5 Q: So you wouldn't know for sure? 6 A: No. 7 Q: But when you make an arrest you 8 generally don't know for sure, right, either way? 9 A: Yeah, 100 percent, not all the time. 10 Q: No. But you have to have reasonable 11 and probable grounds to believe that the person committed 12 an offence, right? That's -- 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: -- the criteria you need? 15 A: Yes, sir. 16 Q: And in considering whether you have 17 reasonable probable grounds, you must consider all the 18 information that's available to you at the time, 19 including evidence that might suggest that they were not 20 involved, right? 21 A: Yes, sir. 22 Q: And I'm suggesting to you, if a 23 composed young person said this guy's my relative and we 24 -- we weren't there when he was shot, we were back in the 25 Camp, but we're driving him to hospital, that would be


1 something that might make you -- you would have to 2 consider in determining whether or not you have 3 reasonable probable grounds, right? 4 A: Yes, sir. 5 Q: And did it give you pause to think 6 that Dudley George was obviously, at least, seriously 7 wounded? You may not have realized he was mortally 8 wounded at the time, right? 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: But you realized he was certainly 11 seriously wounded, right? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And it didn't give you any pause to 14 think that here are some relatives of a person bringing 15 him to hospital, and I'm going to arrest them and take 16 them away and Dudley just goes to hospital? 17 A: Well, I feel bad about that, I really 18 do. 19 Q: Did you feel bad at the time? 20 A: It was pretty hectic at the time, 21 there's no doubt about that. 22 Q: So you didn't have time to think 23 about it at the time? 24 A: At the time, no, I didn't. 25 Q: Okay. In retrospect --


1 A: It would -- certainly. 2 Q: -- that might have been a 3 consideration? 4 A: Absolutely, certainly. 5 Q: And also, I think you were asked by 6 Ms. Vella about the possibility of them providing some 7 medical knowledge to the people who were to care for 8 Dudley George. And in retrospect, again, you recognize 9 that should have been a consideration, right? 10 A: Yeah, and also, but we did know where 11 they were so like a quick phone call could have done that 12 as well. 13 Q: Yeah, a quick phone call could have 14 ascertained that they weren't there, right? 15 A: No. 16 Q: And therefore they shouldn't be 17 arrested at all, right? 18 A: Well, no. 19 Q: Is that what you mean or -- 20 A: No, for medical -- for the medical. 21 Q: Oh, a quick phone call to whom? 22 A: To the detachment. I would -- they 23 were -- they were taken to Strathroy Detachment, so if 24 the medical -- 25 Q: Oh, a quick phone call to those


1 people there? 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: I see. 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: In other words, you could have -- I 6 didn't understand you but you're -- 7 A: I'm sorry. 8 Q: -- suggesting that the medical people 9 could have been informed these relatives of Dudley George 10 have been taken to Forest Detachment. If you want any -- 11 A: Well, Strathroy. 12 Q: -- medical instruction phone them 13 there? 14 A: Strathroy Detachment, which is -- 15 Q: Or Strathroy Detachment. 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: If you want any medical information 18 from them phone them there? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: But they were not so informed; the 21 medical people, as far as you know? 22 A: They didn't seem to have any -- any 23 questions apparently, to my knowledge. 24 Q: But, you have no indication that they 25 were told, if you want to get information from relatives


1 phone Strathroy Detachment, right? 2 A: Well, if they would have asked us we 3 could have done that. 4 Q: But, how were they to ask you sir, 5 they didn't even see these relatives right, because you 6 took them away before Dudley George was brought into the 7 hospital, right? 8 A: I don't know what they saw and didn't 9 see. 10 Q: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I know 12 you're not finished Mr. Rosenthal. I'm just wondering 13 how much longer you might be, because I don't want to go 14 much later than this? 15 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm sorry, sir? 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't want 17 to go too much later. We start at 9:00 and -- 18 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, I -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- I'm 20 getting tired and I'm sure the Witness is but I know you 21 are not finished. 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I would guess 23 twenty-five (25) minutes to thirty-five (35) minutes, 24 sir. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You


1 estimated an hour, you've been about three-quarters 2 (3/4's), but you think you still have that much more? 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I shall try to be 4 as expeditious as possible, it's all I can promise you. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, if you 6 do I'm going to adjourn. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: But, I do think it 8 will be about -- I would guess -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We're not 10 going to finish today -- 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- thirty-five (35) 12 minutes would be my best guess. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- I see Ms. 14 Jones on her feet, we're not going to finish today. 15 MS. KAREN JONES: No, Mr. Commissioner I 16 think it's evident that we're not going to finish today. 17 And I'm wondering given the extended period of time that 18 Mr. Rosenthal's suggesting, perhaps if we broke now -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what 20 -- exactly -- 21 MS. KAREN JONES: -- he'd have an 22 opportunity over the evening to see if he consolidated 23 that a bit. We still have two (2) more people to go and 24 it's -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's


1 exactly what I was thinking Ms. Jones, so I'm on the same 2 wavelength. I know you're not finished -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Thank you. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- and I 5 think this would be a good time to break for the day and 6 have you finish -- 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm certainly in 8 your hands, sir. Thank you. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- tomorrow. 10 We still have at least two (2) more examinations plus, 11 Ms. Jones. So I think this would be a good time to break 12 for the day. 13 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Thank you Mr. 14 Commissioner. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'll 16 adjourn until tomorrow morning at 9:00. 17 18 (WITNESS RETIRES) 19 20 THE REGISTRAR: This public inquiry is 21 adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, June the 9th at 9:00 22 a.m. 23 24 --- Upon adjourning at 5:18 P.M. 25


1 2 3 4 5 Certified Correct 6 7 8 9 10 11 ___________________________ 12 Carol Geehan 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25