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 March 21st, 2006 25


1 Appearances 2 Derry Millar ) Commission Counsel 3 Susan Vella ) (np) 4 Donald Worme, Q. C ) 5 Katherine Hensel ) (np) 6 Megan Ferrier ) 7 8 Murray Klippenstein ) 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 16 Anthony Ross ) (np) Residents of 17 Cameron Neil ) Aazhoodena (Army Camp) 18 Kevin Scullion ) 19 20 William Henderson ) Kettle Point & Stony 21 Jonathon George ) (np) Point First Nation 22 Colleen Johnson ) (np) 23 24 25


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


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


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 Julian Falconer ) Aboriginal Legal 3 Brian Eyolfson ) (np) Services of Toronto 4 Kimberly Murray ) (np) 5 Julian Roy ) (np) 6 Clem Nabigon ) (np) 7 Linda Chen ) (np) 8 Chris Darnay ) (np) 9 Sunil Mathai ) 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 ) (np) 24 Maanit Zemel ) 25 Patrick Greco ) (np)


1 APPEARANCES (cont'd) 2 3 David Roebuck ) (np) Debbie Hutton 4 Anna Perschy ) 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 7 4 5 Opening Comments 6 7 Mark Anthony Wright, Resumed 8 Continued Cross-Examination by Mr. Peter Rosenthal 11 9 Cross-Examination by Mr. Kevin Scullion 81 10 Cross-Examination by Mr. William Henderson 201 11 Cross-Examination by Mr. Julian Falconer 223 12 Cross-Examination by Mr. Mark Sandler 470 13 14 15 16 17 Certificate of Transcript 495 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 EXHIBITS 2 No. Description Page 3 P-1152 Document Number 1002186. Statement of 4 OPP Constable John K. S. Spencer, 5 September 07, 1995. 197 6 P-1153 Transcript of taped interview of Staff 7 Sgt. Wade Lacroix, September 08, 1995. 317 8 P-1154 Transcript of Korosec - Jacklin, 9 Track 1, OPP logger tape number 2, 10 Disc 1 of 3, Region 2, Mobile Command 11 Unit, September 05, 1995. 23:32 hrs. 327 12 P-1155 Transcript of Stan Korosec, September 06, 13 1995, 20:25 hrs, Mobile Command Unit, OPP 14 logger tape number 04, Track 3, Disc 2 15 of 3, region 21. 328 16 P-1156 Transcript of Rob Graham - Stan Korosec, 17 September 06,1995, 17:13 hrs., Mobile 18 Command Unit, from OPP logger tape 19 number 3, Track 3, Disc 2 of 3, Region 15. 362 20 P-1157 Transcript of Rob Huntley, September 05, 21 1995, 13:38 hrs., Mobile Command Unit, 22 Logger tape number 1, track 1, disc 1 23 of 3, 7:43 at 5:55:59. 447 24 25


1 LIST OF EXHIBITS (cont'd) 2 Exhibit No. Description Page No. 3 P-1158: Document Number 1004957. Statement 4 of Senior Constable Leo Weverink 5 OPP September 08, 1995. 493 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 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, everybody. Do you have any other questions this 8 morning, Mr. Klippenstein? 9 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Good morning, 10 Commissioner. In follow-up to your comments yesterday, 11 as a lawyer I am certainly aware of some further 12 questions I'd like to ask but the Estate and the family 13 recognize there's practical limits and they support the 14 idea of the Inquiry moving to its conclusion as fast as 15 reasonably possible, so, I'm instructed to bite my tongue 16 and sit down. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 18 very much. Thank you. 19 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: And thank you 20 for your consideration. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 22 Rosenthal...? 23 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm instructed not 24 to bite my tongue and to stand up. 25 Thank you. Good morning, Mr.


1 Commissioner. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 3 morning. You still have some cross-examination left. 4 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I do, sir, thank 5 you. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 7 Do you have any idea how much -- 8 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I would -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- how long 10 you might be? 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- guess about an 12 hour and twenty (20) minutes; an hour and a half or -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- something like 15 that. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Carry on. 17 18 MARK ANTHONY WRIGHT, Resumed 19 20 CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 21 Q: Good morning, sir. 22 A: Good morning. 23 Q: Now, as you've told us you're an 24 experienced criminal investigator; is that correct? 25 You've investigated a number of


1 allegations of criminal activity over the years? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And you're aware that sometimes 4 witnesses tend to, even honest witnesses, tend to 5 exaggerate sometimes to try to make a point; is that -- 6 isn't that fair? 7 A: Sure. 8 Q: Maybe describe things as a little bit 9 more intense than they really were because they're trying 10 to impress upon you the investigator, for example, as to 11 how serious it is; right? 12 A: Okay. Sure. Sometimes. 13 Q: You've observed that kind of thing? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: On the other hand you as a police 16 officer would have a responsibility not to allow yourself 17 to fall into that kind of a trap; wouldn't you agree? 18 A: Sure. 19 Q: And to report accurately, as 20 accurately as you can? 21 A: Right. 22 Q: Now, I'm concerned about this 23 question of how many persons you observed in the sandy 24 parking lot, and I was listening on the webcast yesterday 25 as Mr. Klippenstein examined you about that.


1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: And I was thinking back then to my 3 examination of you about that earlier. And you recalled 4 that the first report and you don't necessarily need to 5 turn to it, is the phone call at your Tab 35 which is P- 6 1115 transcript of September 6th where you reported there 7 were up to eight (8) persons, right? 8 A: I think so. 9 Q: Do you recall that? Well you can 10 turn to it if you like but -- 11 A: Well, if you're going to refer to it, 12 I think it's probably best that I have a look. 13 Q: Sure. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 15 Rosenthal, this area has been covered in some 16 considerable detail by -- 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, sir. But I 18 wanted to make another point about it. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Another 20 point? Because I really would -- 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I was trying to go 22 quickly through this but he -- of course he has the right 23 to -- to look at the transcript. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, but I'm 25 just saying that this area was --


1 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- the 3 number was covered in some detail by Mr. Klippenstein. 4 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. No, I 5 appreciate that and -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- as I indicated 8 there's a contradiction between what he told Mr. 9 Klippenstein and what he had told me. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right 11 then. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 14 Q: Now, sir, what you told in response 15 to me on March 7th and perhaps we could have this put up 16 on the screen, the transcript of your testimony of March 17 7 at pages 284 to 285, question at about line 10. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: What page? 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Page 284 of March 23 7. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)


1 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 2 Q: Now -- for some reason I have 3 different lines here, but anyway, looking at line 19 is 4 displayed there. 5 "Q: Okay, you said up to eight (8) 6 individuals. You agree that up to 7 eight 8 (8) means a maximum of eight (8), 9 right? 10 A: Yes, sure. 11 Q: And would suggest something five 12 (5), six (6), seven (7), eight (8), 13 something like that, right? 14 A: Up to eight (8), sure. 15 Q: Wouldn't suggest it's as few as 16 three (3) of four (4) probably, right? 17 A: No. 18 Q: But certainly nothing more than 19 eight (8), maybe five (5), six (6), 20 seven (7) or eight (8), right? 21 A: Maybe eight (8). Well, sure it 22 was a rough number." 23 Q: Now you did give that evidence under 24 oath at this Inquiry; is that correct, sir? 25 A: Yes. Yes.


1 Q: And that was describing the first 2 report that you made of the number of people, right? 3 A: Hmm hmm. 4 Q: Right after you observed -- 5 A: Sure, yeah. 6 Q: Now if we could turn please to your 7 Tab 18, the scribe notes which are Exhibit P-426, Inquiry 8 Document 1002419 on page 73 thereof. 9 A: Where are we going again, sir? 10 Q: Tab 18 -- 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: -- page 73. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: At 19:55 hours there, it says: 18 "Mark Wright reports via police radio, 19 ten (10) Natives with baseball bats 20 near the road who apparently have 21 damaged a private vehicle." 22 Now, that would presumably be a report of 23 that same radio transmission that we just referred to; is 24 that correct? 25 A: Presumably, yes.


1 Q: There's no other one that you're 2 aware of? 3 A: Not that I -- I don't know. Not that 4 I'm aware of. 5 Q: Apparently whoever recorded this did 6 the kind of exaggeration we were talking about, right? 7 A: Well, I -- I disagree with you. 8 Q: You disagree with me? 9 A: I disagree that it's an exaggeration. 10 Q: You disagree that the report, "Ten 11 (10) Natives with baseball bats" is an exaggeration from 12 up to eight (8), some of whom had bats? 13 A: Baseball bats. I'd -- I'd call that 14 an error in the scribe notes but I'm not the author of 15 the scribe notes, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 19 Q: Well, it's an error in the direction 20 of making it seem significantly worse than it was right? 21 A: I'm not the author of the scribe 22 notes. 23 Q: No, I appreciate that, sir, but 24 you're an experienced criminal investigator and I'm 25 asking you --


1 A: Does -- 2 Q: -- is this not the kind of error that 3 we talked about of a person exaggerating the situation? 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 5 Sandler...? 6 MR. MARK SANDLER: How could he possibly 7 know whether this is a clerical error -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He can't. 9 He didn't have anything to do with writing it. 10 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- or an exaggeration? 11 He's not responsible for it. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't see 13 how he can answer that question. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, with respect 15 I would think an expert like he could but -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- if his counsel 18 thinks he can't -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 20 think he can. 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- and you think he 22 can't I'll move on. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL:


1 Q: But you, in fact, changed your report 2 from up to eight (8) to eight (8) to ten (10) on several 3 occasions subsequently that night; isn't that correct, 4 sir? 5 A: Hmm hmm. I don't know. 6 Q: You don't know? 7 A: I think -- I -- I thought I was 8 fairly clear yesterday that when I looked at the sandy 9 parking lot I took a quick estimate of what there were. 10 When I talked to you in my evidence-in- 11 chief I think if we go into the totality of the evidence 12 when you and I were speaking I suggested to you as well 13 that it was a very quick look. I was there only but a 14 minute perhaps and I did the best that I could. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 16 THE WITNESS: And it's the same evidence 17 that I gave to Mr. Klippenstein yesterday. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: For what 19 it's worth, Mr. Rosenthal, for what it's worth I don't 20 think it's of any value to pursue this issue any further 21 if it's a question of numbers. 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: With respect, Mr. 23 Commissioner -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think 25 we've heard quite enough on this point.


1 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Mr. Commissioner, 2 may I make submissions on that? 3 We are told that the officers marched down 4 the road that night and ended up killing Dudley George -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I -- 6 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- partially 7 because -- sir, with respect. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, sir? 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Partially because 10 of this Witness' evidence that there were eight (8) to 11 ten (10) persons with baseball bats there and -- and the 12 original observation was up to eight (8) -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- and in my 15 respectful submission it's important to explore that 16 difference. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's an 18 important argument that you'll make but we've heard 19 enough evidence on the point; that's my point. We've 20 heard enough evidence on this matter. 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, may -- may I 22 just ask the following question, sir, -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, sir. 24 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- of whether this 25 Witness -- does he claim that he never said eight (8) to


1 ten (10)? Anyway... 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 3 if that's what he said or not and I'm getting more 4 confused rather than clarifying it so I think -- 5 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, well, may I 6 clarify by asking him -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, what 8 happens when you go over this again and again is it gets 9 less clear rather than more, so I think we've heard 10 enough evidence on this point of numbers of people. Mr. 11 Klippenstein went over it in great detail and, with 12 respect, I don't think that it's necessary to pursue this 13 issue any further with -- 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: With respect -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- regarding 16 the number of people. I understand it's an important 17 issue. 18 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, but with 19 respect to this Witness' credibility may I just ask him, 20 did I understand him to be claiming that he never 21 reported to anyone it was eight (8) to ten (10)? 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 23 don't -- 24 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: May -- may I 25 clarify that?


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't have 2 a recollection of how many times he has made reference to 3 the number of people -- 4 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- so I 6 don't know exactly what he said. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: But may I just ask 8 him that question then, sir, so that we have that 9 information? 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 12 Q: Sir, do you claim that you never told 13 anyone it was eight (8) to ten (10) persons? 14 A: Without looking at every piece of 15 document, sir, I don't recall using the number 10 but I 16 could be mistaken. I thought it was up to eight (8). 17 Q: I see. 18 A: But I can't remember. I -- I think 19 it was up to eight (8). 20 Q: Okay. Well, if we could please turn 21 to your Tab 58, Commission documents Tab 58 which is P- 22 737 Inquiry Document 3000504? 23 A: Right. 24 Q: I -- I'm sorry, Tab 58 is P-462, 25 Inquiry Document 1000445, page 10. It's your interview


1 on September 12th. 2 A: Right. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: Now, the bottom of page 10 of that 7 interview, next to last line: 8 "When I got there I saw approximately-" 9 A: Sure. 10 Q: "-- eight (8) to ten (10) Native 11 males standing on the edge of the 12 road --" 13 A: Right. 14 Q: "-- where the road meets the sand and 15 four (4) to five (5) of them had what I 16 would describe as clubs in their hand." 17 A: Hmm hmm. 18 Q: You did tell -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- Inspector Goodall that when he 21 interviewed -- 22 A: September -- 23 Q: -- you on September 12th, right? 24 A: Agreed. 25 Q: And you told other people the figure,


1 "up to ten (10)" too didn't you? 2 A: Up to ten (10)? 3 Q: Well, here you said eight (8) to ten 4 (10). 5 A: Right. 6 Q: You did use the word 'ten' to other 7 people -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I -- 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- right? 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've 11 indicated that whether there was -- does anything 12 significant other than the issue of credibility -- 13 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, sir. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- turn on 15 whether it was eight (8), up to eight (8), nine (9) or 16 ten (10)? 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It does? 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Not -- what is 20 significant is the following. This officer who played a 21 very key role in deciding that -- whether they would 22 march down the road that day observed up to eight (8) -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. Well, 24 he's said different things at different times. 25 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: It's not clear --


1 clear that that was his initial observation and my cross- 2 examination on March 7th makes that very clear. But 3 nonetheless, he reported to others an exaggerated version 4 of that. And that is very important for you to 5 understand, Mr. Commissioner, in trying to understand 6 what happened that night. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 8 haven't heard anything so far that's helpful and beyond 9 what we've heard already. 10 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you have 12 something to say on this, Mr. Sandler? 13 MR. MARK SANDLER: Yes, I'm a little 14 concerned that My -- My Friend is putting -- and -- and 15 you've got the issue fully about credibility -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think so. 17 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- and My Friend can 18 argue credibility to his heart's content at some point 19 down the road, but -- but to suggest that this impacts 20 upon the decision to go down the road which -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 22 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- is what My Friend 23 is now putting to you, when he hasn't taken him to 20:49 24 of the scribed notes is really unfair because that's what 25 he tells John Carson.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I'm 2 sorry -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, let's look at 4 20:49. I don't know what it says but let's just take a 5 look. What does it say? 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: There... 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Okay, sir, 20:49 11 Mark Wright is reported as saying: 12 "I see eight (8) people at the corner 13 and at least -- at least four (4) had 14 bats or something like that." 15 That's what you said at 20:49. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, that's 17 why I say we've gone back and forth over this. 18 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, sir. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We've heard 20 this evidence a number of times. 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, and he's going 22 -- sir -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's my 24 point. Not that it isn't important. I agree it's 25 important but we've heard it already.


1 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Mr. Commissioner, 2 the very fact that he's going back and forth is very 3 significant. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But he's 5 does that so you don't just keep going back and forth. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, he's not -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: At some 8 point you move on. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, he's not going 10 back and forth. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 12 think so either. 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. -- I went over 14 this issue, Mr. Rosenthal went over this issue, Mr. 15 Klippenstein went -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- over this issue in 18 great detail yesterday and we're just going back and 19 re-plowing and re-plowing. For example -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: At some 21 point we move on. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- Linton -- Linton 23 says to Carson, "Up to eight (8) people" in this 24 telephone conversation, or "eight (8) people" in this 25 telephone conversation with -- with Carson at -- shortly


1 after eight o'clock. But the scribe notes says eight (8) 2 people at 20:49 and -- and -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- and we -- we've 5 had, I don't know probably an hour or over an hour on 6 this point of examination already. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'd like to 8 move off this point, Mr. Rosenthal. I'm not saying it's 9 not an important point, I'm not saying -- 10 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: May I just state 11 the following -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- you can't 13 argue it but we've heard enough about this. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: This Witness 15 testified under oath at this Inquiry eight (8) to ten 16 (10) during his direct examination with Mr. Millar. And 17 the fact that this Witness has been back and forth is, in 18 my respectful submission, significant given his evidence 19 of a few moments ago that a police officer should not do 20 that. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You'll make 22 your argument at the appropriate time. 23 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, but I need to 24 -- I need to -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And now I'm


1 asking you to move on. 2 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- emphasize how 3 many times he's been back and forth to make that 4 argument. I will move on now, sir, but -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 6 Mr. Rosenthal. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- I just wanted to 8 explain why, in my view, it was important to do at least 9 as much as I did this morning and I would like to do more 10 of that to illustrate it but I will move on following 11 your directions. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 13 Mr. Rosenthal. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 18 Q: Now, Inspector Carson was relying on 19 you for information to some extent in the course of these 20 events, right? 21 A: Sure. 22 Q: Now, in addition to your observation 23 of persons in the sandy parking lot, there was the 24 incident with respect to the car that occurred that night 25 and that played a role in deciding what to do about the


1 situation, right? 2 A: You'd have to ask Inspector Carson 3 about that, sir. 4 Q: Well, it's your understanding that 5 played some role, is that not true? 6 A: I would say it played a very minor 7 role. 8 Q: I see, okay. Your understanding the 9 car incident played a very minor role in deciding what 10 to do that night? 11 A: Absolutely. 12 Q: Okay. But nonetheless you knew -- 13 you told us that it involved some stones is what you 14 thought, stones, rocks. 15 A: Stones. 16 Q: There's not a big difference between 17 those. 18 A: My evidence it was stones. 19 Q: And you knew that it was a Band 20 Councillor's car? 21 A: At some point, and my evidence is 22 that I'm not sure when I become alive to the fact that 23 it's a Councillor. Sometime obviously prior to the 24 injunction because I make that point in the injunction on 25 the morning of September the 7th. But I don't know when


1 that -- when I become aware of that. 2 Q: And Mr. Millar put to you some 3 information regarding that reported by Inspector Linton 4 that was incorrect that included a female and so on and 5 you -- you suggested you did not give him that 6 information, sir? 7 A: Right. 8 Q: Right. And when you discussed that 9 incident with Inspectors Carson and Linton, you knew it 10 was a male person. 11 A: I never discussed it with Inspectors 12 Carson and Linton together. 13 Q: Never together, but separately -- 14 A: No. 15 Q: -- in the course of that evening, 16 this incident came up, with both of them; is that fair? 17 A: I don't believe it came up again with 18 Inspector Carson that evening. I spoke to him on the 19 telephone shortly after I got back to the command post, 20 and I stand to be corrected, but I don't think him and I 21 talked about that again. 22 Q: I see. 23 A: I mean, I -- it's eleven (11) years 24 ago, I don't remember -- I don't remember seeing that in 25 the scribe notes at all.


1 Q: You told us on February 23rd, that 2 the reason that you assigned Constable Poole to be the 3 person who did the interview of the person who had been 4 driving that car -- 5 A: Right. 6 Q: -- was because you knew him to be a 7 diligent person who would do a good job of taking of 8 statements, right? 9 A: Right. 10 Q: When, in that evening, did you become 11 aware of the contents of Constable Poole's report? 12 A: Well, I got a -- I got -- as we've 13 done here earlier as -- I had an -- that information from 14 the statement -- portions of that information, the 15 important parts that I felt were important, relayed to me 16 by way of questioning down at the scene and I -- there's 17 a number of tapes that we talk about where I'm asking 18 Poole about, can the person identify the individual who 19 did the damage to his vehicle, et cetera, et cetera. 20 At some point, my recollection is I send 21 someone down there to get the statement and bring it 22 back, and I talked about there was a question about 23 having it relayed back and I didn't want that happening. 24 I wanted it brought back by one (1) person. 25 And my recollection was that Dew was the


1 one who was going to bring it back, Mark Dew. 2 Q: And he did bring it back, then? 3 A: As -- I can't recall, sir. I'm sure 4 he did, but I can't -- I don't have an independent 5 recollection of that. 6 Q: You don't recall seeing the statement 7 that night? 8 A: I may very well have, but I just 9 don't recall. 10 Q: But you got the essence of the 11 information in that statement in the course of the 12 evening, as you've told us? 13 A: Yeah, yeah. 14 Q: And did you report that essence to 15 Inspector Carson and/or Inspector Linton? 16 A: I -- I don't recall. I was of the 17 impression that Linton, obviously, was of the same 18 information that I was. 19 I had no idea he was -- he thought it was 20 a lady who -- whose car had been damaged by ten (10) 21 people with baseball bats. 22 Q: So Linton had -- had been around 23 during that period and you assumed that he was getting 24 similar information to what you were getting? 25 A: Well, if you -- if -- again, one of


1 the -- in my evidence in-chief, there's a tape there 2 where Linton is on the phone waiting for Carson, and he's 3 paging Carson. 4 And through that -- his telephone -- 5 Linton's telephone, you hear me giving instructions to 6 the civilian radio operator about asking Poole to confirm 7 that the person who had his -- the guy who had his car 8 damaged by stones can identify those people. 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: So that -- that was the point I made 11 that I was of the -- you know, it went right through his 12 phone and he's standing there, so I was of the -- 13 Q: So -- so Linton should have, you 14 thought, been aware. But Carson was away at this time? 15 A: Carson was away at this time, yes, 16 right. 17 Q: So when he came back, you would have 18 given him the essence of what you learned from Poole; is 19 that fair? 20 A: No, I don't think so. I think -- 21 Q: You don't -- 22 A: -- what happened was, I talked to 23 Carson on the phone and, shortly after I got back, and 24 then I became engaged with Mr. McCabe from MAG and Carson 25 showed up and he and Linton, I guess, had a conversation,


1 whatever. 2 A number of things have gone on and I've 3 given evidence to that, that there are a number of radio 4 calls coming in -- 5 Q: I heard -- 6 A: -- and things are -- 7 Q: Sorry, I'm trying to be more 8 expeditious if I could. So, did you -- you did not speak 9 to Carson about what you learned from Poole about the 10 incident involving the vehicle? 11 A: I don't recollect that, no. 12 Q: I see. Okay, now we know that the 13 crowd management unit did march down that road -- 14 A: Absolutely. 15 Q: -- and we know that Dudley George was 16 killed. 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: When did you first learn that it was 19 Ken Deane that had shot Dudley George? 20 A: I don't know. 21 Q: But sometime that evening? 22 A: I don't think so. 23 Q: Not that evening? 24 A: No. 25 Q: When did you first learn that it was


1 alleged that Dudley George had had a rifle? 2 A: When was it -- not that evening, I 3 don't think. 4 Q: Not that evening? 5 A: No. My -- from -- actually, I'm sure 6 of it, because if you listen to the conversations I have 7 with Parkin, I'm under the impression that Mr. George is 8 in the vehicle when he's shot. 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: So -- 11 Q: At the time -- at that time -- 12 A: -- no idea that there's an allegation 13 that Mr. George has got a rifle; not that night. 14 Q: Sir, certainly at the time of the 15 conversation with Superintendent Parkin you didn't have 16 that knowledge but you didn't acquire that knowledge any 17 other time during that evening either? 18 A: No, and I -- I didn't give that 19 evidence. Had I known that I'm sure I would have given 20 that at the injunction and I -- I didn't give that 21 evidence either. 22 Q: Now, you told us that you thought it 23 was important to do something about the people standing 24 in the parking lot because of public safety concerns, 25 right?


1 A: Right. 2 Q: Now, after the killing of Dudley 3 George it was a rather chaotic situation; is that fair? 4 A: Fair. 5 Q: And the public safety concerns were 6 much greater then; right? 7 A: Absolutely. I would agree. 8 Q: And the officers though marched back 9 down the road back to the Tactical Operations Centre, 10 right? 11 A: Well, I wouldn't say they marched I'd 12 say -- 13 Q: They fled in disarray, perhaps? 14 A: Yes, I -- I would agree with that. 15 Yeah. 16 Q: Why didn't you think it was crucial 17 to keep officers there to protect public safety when it 18 was a much more dangerous situation than earlier? 19 A: Well, sir, I don't take issue with 20 any of that but you know it wasn't my call. I wasn't the 21 Incident Commander there and, absolutely, there was 22 public safety concern there but you know Inspectors 23 Carson and then Coles showed up and their decision was to 24 move it back because of officer safety and you'd have to 25 ask them that.


1 Q: I see. But your view was that, as it 2 had been earlier, that public safety required officers 3 being there en masse? 4 A: I -- en masse? 5 Q: In large numbers? 6 A: I would -- I would say to you that -- 7 I would say that the public safety was definitely a 8 concern, certainly as far as I was concerned the morning 9 of September 7th I guess that would be, yes, absolutely 10 and one only has to look -- watch the tapes of what took 11 place the morning of September 7th. 12 Q: So did you discuss that with 13 Inspector Carson? Did you suggest -- 14 A: I wasn't there. I wasn't there. I 15 was in -- I was in Sarnia giving evidence. I didn't get 16 back until later on in the afternoon. 17 Q: No, but going back to when the order 18 was given for the CMU officers to withdraw from the 19 area -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- did you suggest to Inspector 22 Carson that's a dangerous thing to do, we need to protect 23 people -- 24 A: I didn't -- 25 Q: -- or anything to that effect?


1 A: I was engaged in numerous other 2 things at that time, sir; that wasn't my call. I -- I 3 was involved with, as I've given evidence, a many -- 4 many, many different things and Inspector Carson was the 5 Incident Commander, and like I said yesterday, I had 6 overwhelming confidence in him and he was handling that 7 as best he saw fit. 8 Q: Now, when did you first get any 9 information about the car that allegedly drove towards 10 officers in the course of the evening? 11 A: When did I first get any? Well, I 12 think I -- Lacroix says -- says a number of things over 13 the radio and I'm in the Command Post and then I -- I 14 recall talking to some of the ERT guys when they were 15 coming back after the incident. 16 Q: And what -- 17 A: And I talked to Lacroix when he got 18 back. 19 Q: And from those sources what did you 20 learn about the nature of the car? Did you learn about 21 the colour of the car? 22 A: No, no. 23 Q: You didn't learn anything about the 24 colour? 25 A: Not that I recall, no.


1 Q: Okay. Throughout the course of the 2 evening you were unaware of the colour of the car? 3 A: Well, no, at -- at some point later 4 on in the evening I was of the impression that a white 5 car had been involved in that. 6 Q: And what gave you that impression? 7 A: Well, as I've given evidence in my 8 chief is that I was alive to the -- with the information 9 that a -- a bus and a car had engaged the CMU. And I 10 won't go into details, we know what happened. 11 Q: Yes. 12 A: And then -- and there was gunfire. 13 Shortly thereafter we get a call about a car at Nauvoo 14 Road with a person with a gunshot wound, suffering a 15 gunshot wound and that vehicle -- 16 Q: That was a white car? 17 A: Right. And that vehicle is on its 18 way to Strathroy, and that vehicle is the same vehicle 19 that shows up at Nauvoo Road. 20 Q: Yes. 21 A: So the leap is made that -- you know 22 that's how I made the leap for the colour of the car. 23 Q: Okay. So you -- you didn't have any 24 identification of the car as being white from the 25 incident? What you knew was that there was a white car


1 that had been transporting Dudley George to hospital? 2 A: I didn't even know it was Dudley 3 George. I just knew -- 4 Q: But they were transporting someone to 5 the hospital? 6 A: -- a person, somebody with a gunshot 7 wound and -- and the -- and the -- that's -- you know I 8 was -- we're in Lambton County, this isn't, you know, New 9 York City. There was -- there was gunplay that night; 10 there wasn't gunplay anyplace else in Lambton County that 11 night I would have heard it over the air. 12 And there was a vehicle and there was a -- 13 there was a victim of a gunshot wound. We just had a 14 vehicle involved in an incident with OPP officers where 15 the OPP officers have shot inside a vehicle. 16 I thought it was reasonable to make the -- 17 it was a reasonable assumption on my part that the 18 individual who was in the vehicle had taken a round from 19 an OPP officer. 20 Q: Yes. 21 A: And -- 22 Q: And you went further than that. 23 A: Yes, I did. 24 Q: You ass -- you assumed that that 25 vehicle that was transporting him to hospital --


1 A: Right. 2 Q: -- was the vehicle that had been 3 involved in the incident, correct? 4 A: That's right. 5 Q: And you learned later that was a 6 completely false assumption? 7 A: Some time later. 8 Q: Yes. When did you learn that? 9 A: It wasn't that day. 10 Q: Wasn't that day? 11 A: It was -- it -- my recollection, sir, 12 is it was several days before we knew, and again this is 13 a long time ago, but it was several days before we knew 14 that it wasn't the white car; that's my recollection. 15 Q: When you heard that there was a white 16 car that was transporting an injured person to Strathroy 17 Hospital -- 18 A: Right. 19 Q: You didn't check with any officers as 20 to the colour of the car that had driven at them that 21 night, did you? 22 A: I didn't have an opportunity at that 23 time, no. 24 Q: You didn't have an opportunity? 25 A: That's right.


1 Q: You couldn't have -- where was Staff 2 Sergeant Lacroix? You couldn't have asked him what -- 3 A: He may have been gone at that time. 4 Even if -- 5 Q: Was he gone, sir? 6 A: Pardon me? 7 Q: Was he gone at that time? 8 A: I don't know. You'd have to check 9 the scribe -- I mean, off the top of my head, I couldn't 10 -- I couldn't do that for -- that math for you. 11 Q: Sir, is it not true that there were a 12 number of officers still around who had been involved in 13 that incident? 14 A: I don't know. 15 Q: Did you make any attempt to find out 16 what the colour of the car was that was involved in the 17 incident, sir? 18 A: No, I did not. 19 Q: Would you not think that before you 20 arrest people on charges of attempted murder, based on 21 the fact that they're driving a car that you think might 22 have been the car, that you would at least have to check 23 the colour of the car as a minimal thing to do before -- 24 A: No, I disagree -- 25 Q: -- making arrests?


1 A: I disagree with you, sir. 2 Q: You disagree? 3 A: Yes. And if you'd allow me to 4 explain -- 5 Q: Yes, please do. 6 A: -- is, as I said, you know, the 7 arrest was my call -- 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: -- and I've made that clear. And I 10 required reasonable and probable grounds in order to make 11 that call. 12 Q: Yes. 13 A: And I've given my evidence about what 14 I felt was my reasonable and probable grounds and if you 15 wish, I can do that again, but I suspect you -- you've 16 heard it many times. 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: And after we did that, I appreciated 19 that it was a very difficult, dynamic situation and I did 20 -- I was acting in the -- the -- under the best faith 21 that I could. 22 And I had one of the sergeants, the 23 Detective Sergeant Parent, call a Crown Attorney that 24 morning and go over the grounds for the arrest that we 25 had to make sure that we were on firm ground, because I


1 was aware that this was a very dynamic situation; we 2 didn't have all the information. 3 So, there -- that was the due diligence 4 that I exercised with respect to the arrests, above and 5 beyond the reasonable and probable grounds. 6 Q: Now, sir, you told us very clearly in 7 your evidence with Mr. -- when Mr. Millar was asking you 8 direct evidence, what your grounds were -- 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: What hadn't been clarified, I've now 11 clarified, that you didn't know the colour of the car 12 involved in the incident and so all you had was that 13 there was a car involved in the incident, and it was a 14 car driving a wounded person to the hospital. 15 That was the only connection that led you 16 to arrest the brother and sister of the victim, Dudley 17 George. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you have 19 an objection? 20 MR. MARK SANDLER: I have to say, you now 21 have his explanation as to what his reasonable probable 22 grounds are. You've got it a half a dozen times. We'll 23 argue whether that constitutes reasonable probable 24 grounds. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I


1 understand, but he's putting it -- 2 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm summarizing it, 3 Mr. Commissioner and I -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He can 5 disagree with you. 6 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I would like to do 7 that in cross-examination. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He can 9 disagree with you if he chooses to, is that what you're 10 saying? 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm sorry, sir? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He can 13 answer the question in any way that he chooses to. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Of course he can 15 answer. I don't control the answers, I only control the 16 questions, to some extent. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 18 Go ahead, ask the question. 19 THE WITNESS: I heard it. I disagree. 20 21 CONTINUED MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 22 Q: So the only reasonable -- 23 A: What's more -- no. 24 Q: The only grounds you had, sir, were 25 the following: a vehicle had been involved in the


1 incident with the officers -- 2 A: Right. 3 Q: -- and a man who was shot by one of 4 the officers was being transported in a vehicle to the 5 hospital, right? 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's the 7 question you just asked. That's the question he just 8 answered, I thought. 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, did he answer 10 that, yes? Then, I'll move on. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He said no, 12 I disagree with you. 13 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I -- you disagree. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 17 Q: Oh, then please explain. Explain the 18 nature of your disagreement, sir. 19 A: Well, okay, I'll go over my grounds 20 again. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All he's 22 going to do now is repeat the evidence that he's already 23 given. 24 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, the evidence 25 he already gave --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Because he 2 has a different interpret -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- is properly 4 summarized by what I've just said in my -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, you've 6 summarized it but he didn't agree with your summary. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: That's right so 8 what is missing from my summary is a proper follow-up 9 question, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, it 11 means repeating his evidence-in-chief and just going back 12 over it again. When you summarize it and he doesn't 13 agree with it and then you ask him to, in effect, give 14 his evidence again. 15 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, with respect, 16 Mr. Commissioner -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 18 how that moves us forward. 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- I believe I 20 accurately summarized his evidence and -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You believe 22 it and that is a proper thing for you to believe and an 23 argument for you to make but he doesn't agree with you. 24 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, and I have to 25 know the nature of his disagreement so I can make that


1 argument, sir. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I'm trying to 4 clarify this, Mr. Commissioner -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I 6 understand. 7 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- and I -- I -- 8 frankly, I don't understand the objection to my question, 9 Mr. Commissioner. I'm -- I'm trying to clarify this and 10 just because Mr. Sandler stands up -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Forget Mr. 12 Sandler. 13 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- doesn't mean 14 that I don't have a right to clarify. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 16 Your question now is what -- 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I -- I gave my 18 summary. Mr. -- Officer Wright believes that I omitted 19 something that formed part of his reasonable and -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- probable 22 grounds. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 25 Q: What did I omit, sir, is my question?


1 A: Okay. Well, once again, there was -- 2 I was -- I had the following information: that a bus and 3 a car had driven into a crowd of OPP officers and 4 deliberately tried to run them over. We'll talk about 5 the car, deliberately tried to run them over and shots 6 had been discharged from that vehicle and OPP officers 7 had shot point blank, as far as I was concerned, my 8 information was, into that vehicle. 9 Shortly thereafter, and I would say 10 contemporaneous with the incident, we get a call from 11 Nauvoo Road which is in very close proximity to the CFB 12 Ipperwash and Ipperwash Provincial Park along with the 13 reports that we have a number of people looking for that 14 -- there are two (2) people shot as far as we know 15 because of the 911 calls that are coming in. 16 In any event a vehicle shortly thereafter 17 shows up at -- on Nauvoo Road, whatever this day is I 18 can't recall, but -- and I'm sitting in the Comm Centre. 19 So any other gunshots that would take place in the County 20 at that particular time I would be alive to, so, I know 21 there are no other gun -- there is no other gunplay. 22 And an individual comes up to the door and 23 says that you know somebody in the vehicle's been shot 24 and they -- they're asking for help, they don't wait, and 25 they take off and the -- the vehicle, there's a


1 description of the vehicle that's given. That vehicle is 2 then followed, it goes to Strathroy Hospital, and there 3 are a number of individuals in it. 4 Well, my position is that that string of 5 events based on what's taking place and what I know at 6 the time, and potentially that there may be weapons in 7 that vehicle and all sorts of other things, is that it's 8 reasonable for a police officer to come to the conclusion 9 that those individuals in that vehicle were in that 10 vehicle at the time that -- that is the same vehicle that 11 plowed into the officers and exchanged gunfire with the 12 officers down there. And it is reasonable to arrest 13 those people for the attempted murder of those OPP 14 officers. 15 Now, immediately after that becomes your 16 obligation to begin to investigate that but certainly at 17 that particular point, in my opinion, you'd be in neglect 18 if you did not exercise the arrest. 19 Q: Now, you indicated that immediately - 20 - I -- I'll save my response to that for argument, Mr. 21 Commissioner. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what 23 it is. 24 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And that's fine. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You may


1 disagree with his interpretation and some of the facts 2 turn out to be wrong. 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: No, no. I think 4 that my -- I -- I will argue to you that my summary was 5 entirely accurate -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 7 Let's move on. 8 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- in spite of the 9 verbiage that was added. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: But that's for 12 argument. I'll go on if I may. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 16 Q: Now, you said upon making the arrest 17 you have an obligation to investigate further? 18 A: Sure. 19 Q: Did you find out the colour of the 20 car shortly after that arrest was made, sir? 21 A: No, I was engaged in other things, 22 sir. There was -- 23 Q: Did -- 24 A: -- I sent my -- my obligation there - 25 - I sent, I think -- when I gave this evidence, I think


1 three (3) Detective Sergeants or two (2) Detective 2 Sergeants and one (1) acting Detective Sergeant and a 3 number of Detective Constables, senior investigators, 4 down there to deal with that. I can't be dealing with 5 that and because shortly thereafter we have somebody -- 6 there's chaos at the Command Post and I've given that 7 evidence. 8 I was engaged in many different things. 9 That is dealt -- going to be dealt with by those officers 10 down at that scene. 11 Q: sir, may I ask you the following: 12 Would you agree that if the car that had been involved in 13 the incident had been a different colour from the car 14 being driven to the hospital then you would not have had 15 reasonable and probable grounds to arrest them if you 16 knew that fact? 17 A: Sure. 18 Q: Thank you. Now, when did you learn 19 that it was Dudley George's brother and sister that you 20 had caused to be arrested? 21 A: I don't have independent recollection 22 but I've reviewed the evidence and when I'm speaking to 23 Linton, and I think it's about four o'clock in the 24 morning, I make the point that I'm -- I -- I think it's 25 then I'm alive to the fact that it's the brother and


1 sister. 2 Q: Did it not concern you that you had 3 caused the brother and sister of a person who had been 4 killed by police officers to be arrested on grounds that 5 might not hold up at least? 6 A: No, sir, I mean -- 7 Q: It didn't concern you? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Thank you. 10 A: Well, that's a very unfair question. 11 You know, I mean, certainly it's a very tragic set of 12 circumstances that Mr. George's brother and sister were 13 arrested and put in a jail cell, yes, absolutely. 14 I mean, there can be no doubt that that's 15 unfortunate. But at the time I had an honest belief that 16 those people were -- may have been involved in the 17 attempted murder of police officers. 18 So I was, you know, that's unfortunate. 19 But if I didn't feel that way, I certainly wouldn't have 20 told the officers to arrest them. I mean, one goes hand 21 in hand with the other. Either you -- either you have a 22 reasonable belief or you don't. 23 And -- and you know, whether or not 24 they're relatives or not, really can't come into the play 25 of your decision as to whether or not you're going to


1 arrest them or not. 2 Q: You knew by four o'clock in the 3 morning that the chances of the charges sticking against 4 them were nil, didn't you? 5 A: I disagree. 6 Q: You disagree, I see. 7 A: And -- and it's not -- my job as a 8 police officer is I'm required to have reasonable and 9 probable grounds to make an arrest; I don't concern 10 myself with convictions. 11 Q: Would you please turn to Tab 54 of 12 the Commission documents. Tab 54 is Exhibit P-1063 to 13 these proceedings. 14 A: Right. 15 Q: It is a transcript of a telephone 16 call between you and Superintendent Parkin. 17 A: Right. 18 Q: September 7, 1995, 4:31 hours. 19 A: Right. 20 Q: Could you please turn to page 4 of 21 that transcript. 22 A: Sure. 23 Q: At the beginning of page 4, the 24 second line you say: 25 "And Anthony Dudley got there by a


1 white car. 2 SUPERINTENDENT PARKIN: White car. 3 [You] Yeah, now at the -- and the 4 white car when it showed up at 5 Strathroy Hospital, there were four (4) 6 people in it. 7 INSPECTOR PARKIN: Yeah. 8 [You] Dudley or a guy by the name of 9 XXXX -- XXXX XXXX, YO, fourteen (14) 10 years. 11 PARKIN: Yeah. And Kenny and -- 12 [sorry] Perry and Caroline George were 13 a brother and sister of Dudley." 14 So you certainly did know at that point. 15 A: That's -- yeah. 16 Q: And then Inspector Parkin says, "Oh, 17 Jesus." 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: Did you interpret his saying "Oh, 20 Jesus" as his indicating some concern about the fact that 21 the brother and sister of a -- of a victim had been 22 arrested. 23 A: Yeah, it's unfortunate. Sure, sure. 24 Yeah. 25 Q: And then you go on to say:


1 "XXXX XXXX is charged with mischief -- 2 arrested for mischief, pardon me. 3 INSPECTOR PARKIN: Yeah. 4 And the other two (2) are under arrest 5 for attempt murder. 6 INSPECTOR PARKIN: Do they think they 7 were in the car when the shooting took 8 place? 9 INSPECTOR WRIGHT: Yeah. But don't 10 hold your breath for those charges ever 11 sticking." 12 A: Right. 13 Q: So you knew at the time there was 14 very little chance that those charges would stick? 15 A: No, sir. The comment I'm making 16 there is, again, like I said, is that it was a very 17 dynamic situation, we had reasonable and probable grounds 18 to make the arrest. 19 Whether or not there was proof beyond a 20 reasonable doubt for them to be convicted was another 21 thing. And on top of that, my experience as a criminal 22 investigator is that, you know, the charge of attempted 23 murder is -- is more difficult to deal with than the 24 charge of murder. 25 So that's why --


1 Q: And you didn't -- 2 A: -- that's the point I'm making to -- 3 to Superintendent Parkin. 4 Q: And you didn't even feel at this 5 point it was your responsibility to make sure that there 6 was a little more investigation at least to go beyond -- 7 A: No. I disagree. 8 Q: -- the grounds that you had -- 9 A: Sir -- 10 Q: -- before keeping them in custody. 11 A: Sir, if you look at -- I forget what 12 time it is, but I have a conversation with Inspec -- 13 Superintendent Linton where I call Linton -- not -- 14 sorry, not Linton -- Parkin -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Inspector -- 16 Oh, Parkin. 17 THE WITNESS: I call Superintendent 18 Parkin, so I go above and beyond the next rank, which is 19 Carson or Linton, and call Parkin directly at home and I 20 ask him about CIB. 21 And the reason I do that is because I'm 22 aware that SIU is coming to invest -- the -- the police 23 side of the shooting, as it were, okay? 24 We all know what SIU is for. And I knew 25 that we had people arrested at Strathroy Hospital for


1 attempted murder and I had sent seasoned criminal 2 investigators there. 3 Now, the other thing I did was I called 4 Parkin and I said, I -- where is CIB, are they coming and 5 you hear my concern on the telephone, that I feel it's 6 very important that we get a CIB detective inspector down 7 there right away to deal with that. And that's exact -- 8 that's the due diligence again that I do with respect to 9 that arrest. 10 And it turns out to be Goodall later and 11 he -- when he calls me, whatever time that is he's on his 12 way to Forest, he says, Mark, I've got everything under 13 control at the -- at Strathroy. Well, you know, to me 14 that means that he's got everything under control. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 17 Q: That was -- that was well after 4:30 18 in the morning -- 19 A: No. 20 Q: -- of September 7th, sir. 21 A: No. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That is absolutely 23 incorrect. The -- the record will show that that 24 conversation -- if My Friend is going to put -- the 25 purpose is -- is not to confuse the record, but that


1 conversation took -- took place early on in the evening. 2 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, of course the 3 purpose is not to confuse the record, but the purpose is 4 to ask the Witness questions. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 7 Q: When do you recall that conversation 8 taking place? 9 A: Sir, it's -- we have tapes of this. 10 Q: I see. 11 A: It's all taped, it's on the logger. 12 We've heard it here in my evidence in-chief. If you 13 check, you'll -- 14 MR. MARK SANDLER: It's Tab 51 of the 15 Commission's -- 16 THE WITNESS: You know, you'll see that I 17 spoke to Parkin and then I spoke to Goodall and I've 18 heard those logger tapes myself, we have them here. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 21 Q: Okay. Now, you based your order that 22 officers arrest these people on -- on the facts that 23 you've told us, right? 24 A: Right. 25 Q: Now, in particular, did you mention


1 to Goodall or anyone that them being driven there by a -- 2 by a white car was one of the main reasons that you 3 arrested them? 4 A: Sir, once again, Goodall would have 5 gone to -- you're asking me about Goodall, so I'll answer 6 that particular -- 7 Q: Yes. 8 A: -- question. Goodall was at the 9 hospital. I -- again, I made sure that an Inspector was 10 going to be there; that's his job. That's my job now, 11 that's what I do now. 12 And he went there and I assumed, spoke to 13 the seasoned criminal investigators that I sent there. I 14 mean, it would be up to him. I'm not micro managing a 15 Detective Inspector, quite frankly. I've got more than 16 enough to do. 17 That would be his concern to deal with 18 that, not mine. 19 Q: Yes. Sir, I would put to you the 20 following, and you're an experienced criminal 21 investigator and you know this; you know that if an 22 officer arrests someone, he must have reasonable probable 23 grounds as you've told us, right? 24 A: Right. 25 Q: And somebody who just receives a


1 person who's being arrested or just makes an arrest, 2 based on another officer saying arrest him because I have 3 reasonable probable grounds, may not know what the 4 reasonable probable grounds were that the officer had in 5 mind; isn't that fair? 6 A: We're talking hypothetically now, I 7 take it? 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: Sure. 10 Q: And in particular, in this situation, 11 you told the people at Strathroy to arrest the persons 12 who arrived. They may not know fully what you had in 13 mind as your grounds for doing so, right? 14 A: Well, my recollection, I had a 15 conversation with Mark Dew where I explained to him what 16 I felt my grounds were. 17 Q: Okay. But he wouldn't know that it 18 was all your grounds, necessarily, right? 19 He wouldn't know -- 20 A: I don't understand -- 21 Q: -- fully what you're -- 22 A: -- the question. 23 Q: -- thinking? 24 A: Well, sir, the -- you know, I -- if I 25 explained to Detective Dew or whomever what it is, that


1 individual who makes that arrest, the onus is on that 2 individual to -- to make sure that in their own mind, 3 they have the requisite reasonable and probable grounds 4 in which to effect the arrest. 5 Q: And that can be based simply on 6 another officer telling him that he has reasonable 7 probable grounds, right? 8 A: Well, I think it has to be a little 9 bit more than, I've got grounds, arrest the guy. 10 Q: Well -- okay, sir. I'm trying to 11 keep this focussed if I may. 12 A: As am I. 13 Q: Now, would you not agree, sir, as a 14 criminal investigator -- 15 A: Right. 16 Q: Whenever you're investigating 17 something involving an arrest by another officer, you 18 want to know what the grounds were for the other officer 19 making the arrest and so that you can start your 20 investigation by investigating those aspects; isn't that 21 fair? 22 A: Yeah, that's fair. 23 Q: Yes. So you have to know what the 24 officer had in mind, in order to begin your 25 investigation, right?


1 A: Yes, sure, okay. 2 Q: And I'm suggesting -- 3 A: Well, and they'd be -- they'd have 4 their own set of -- they'd be alive to some inform -- I 5 mean, I can't speak for those officers that were there. 6 They were on radios, they knew what was going on, they 7 heard CMU get shot at. They, you know, they were alive 8 to a number of different things. 9 Richardson was there and he went to the 10 hospital as well. I mean -- 11 Q: I'm suggesting to you, sir, that 12 Goodall coming in -- 13 A: Right. 14 Q: -- wouldn't know any background, 15 wouldn't know any details. He has to consider these 16 people are arrested on charges of attempted murder. 17 A: Right. 18 Q: And he doesn't know what the basis is 19 for your making that call to arrest them right? 20 A: Sure, okay. 21 Q: And so I'm suggesting to you that 22 since your basis was simply the car business as you 23 explained fully to us -- 24 A: Hmm hmm. 25 Q: -- it was incumbent upon you to tell


1 Goodall at least that much so that the first thing he 2 would do would be to check the colour of the car, for 3 example? 4 A: Sir, you have to listen -- you know I 5 mean listen to the conversation. Goodall says to me, 6 Mark, I'm at Strathroy. I've got everything under 7 control or everything's looking good or whatever it was 8 he said, something to that effect. 9 Well, you know he's the Detective 10 Inspector; I'm a Staff Sergeant. He -- I know what his 11 job is and part of my job is to make sure that a seasoned 12 case manager is on scene and I did that. And he -- you 13 know I -- it's not up to me to micro-manage a Detective 14 Inspector. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Again we've 16 been back and forth over this, Mr. Rosenthal. 17 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, I'm about to 18 move on, Mr. Commissioner, but... 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 22 Q: Do you know what time Pierre George 23 and Caroline George were released from custody? 24 A: No idea. 25 Q: Did you ever find out?


1 A: No idea. 2 Q: Did -- you did eventually find out 3 that they were not even in the area of the sandy parking 4 lot at the time of incident did you? 5 A: No, I didn't know that. 6 Q: You didn't know that -- 7 A: No. 8 Q: -- til the moment I'm telling you 9 that now? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: I see. 12 A: I did -- I'm not suggesting they were 13 in the sandy parking lot. 14 Q: No. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: But you didn't know -- 17 A: I didn't know that. 18 Q: -- the contrary -- 19 A: No. 20 Q: -- until I just told you a -- 21 A: I didn't think they were in the sand 22 -- and it never occurred to me that they might be there I 23 just never gave it much thought. I didn't give it any 24 thought. 25 Q: It never occurred to you that they


1 might have been in the sandy parking lot? 2 A: Pardon me? 3 Q: It never occurred to you that they 4 might have been is that what you're saying? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: It never occurred to you they might 7 have been in the sandy parking lot? 8 A: Right. Aft -- I mean, at some point 9 I became aware that, you know, Sergeant Deane is the one 10 who shoots Mr. George and Mr. George is alleged to have a 11 rifle and he's walked out -- and all that stuff so -- 12 Q: Right. Right. 13 A: -- you know, the vehicle thing 14 changes right? 15 Q: And it never occurred to you that 16 either Pierre George or Carolyn George might have been 17 involved in the incident with the officers? 18 A: It never occurred to me. No, I would 19 agree with you after -- I'm -- I don't know if I'm -- I'm 20 answering your question or not, sir, I'm -- 21 Q: I thought you did. You agreed with 22 me for a change. 23 A: They -- they -- there was an arrest I 24 thought. Initially I thought they were involved. At 25 some point later it becomes clear that they weren't


1 involved. 2 Q: But even initially you had no 3 indication that they were in the sandy parking lot or 4 anywhere near the incident, right? 5 A: Initially. I -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I -- 7 MR. MARK SANDLER: We're at cross 8 purposes here because -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 10 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- Inspector Wright 11 was still responding to My Friend's questions about after 12 the event you learned about certain things and My Friend 13 is then trying to use that to say you knew it back then. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Back then, 15 yes. 16 MR. MARK SANDLER: And that's not his 17 evidence. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: A little 19 confusing -- 20 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And I'm in the 21 process of trying to clarify it and My Friend gets up -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, you -- 23 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- to give the -- 24 give the -- I was in the process -- the record will show 25 that I was then asking about it initially.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 2 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And My Friend gets 3 up to give the answer. 4 MR. MARK SANDLER: First of all I didn't 5 give the answer; that's -- that's ridiculous. And -- and 6 with great respect it was clear to everybody what he 7 meant but My Friend was then taking it on a tangent as if 8 he'd said something else so it was misleading. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you want 10 to start again, Mr. Rosenthal. Ask a question please. I 11 thought it was clear up until a minute ago. 12 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And, sir, -- yes, 13 and I was trying to clarify. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 15 thought it was clear up until a minute ago so I'm not 16 sure... 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 19 Q: At some -- at some point -- at some 20 point you thought they may have been involved and at some 21 point you realized they were not involved; is that fair? 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I -- 23 THE WITNESS: I can tell you that it 24 didn't matter to me the name of the people in that 25 vehicle at the time of September 6th when I thought, when


1 I formed my reasonable and probable grounds to believe 2 that they were involved in the attempted murder of OPP 3 officers. It made no difference to me who they were. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. 5 THE WITNESS: The fact is they were in 6 that vehicle. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you 8 thought they were involved at that point? 9 THE WITNESS: That's right. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you had 11 reasonable and probable grounds in your view? 12 THE WITNESS: Yeah, and -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Now, you 14 were asking him about a later time -- 15 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- when he 17 found out different facts. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 20 Q: Right. And when did that later -- 21 when did that transition take place? 22 A: I have no idea. Sometime later it 23 became -- I -- I think they were still in custody; they 24 were in custody for some time as I recall. 25 Q: Yes, I -- I believe -- my


1 understanding is they were in custody until the next 2 afternoon, until the afternoon of September 7th? 3 A: Yeah, that's what I think. That's my 4 understanding too, and sir, I -- I mean I've given my 5 evidence to what -- I was a fairly busy individual there 6 and then I left and went to Sarnia and gave the 7 injunction. I didn't get back until I think it was you 8 know 2:00-ish or 3:00-ish and now I could be wrong or 9 something like that in the afternoon. 10 Now -- so I don't know if they were 11 released by then. Obviously Inspector Goodall was on the 12 case and -- and conducting his investigation and at some 13 point he -- you know, the information is that they're not 14 involved. 15 I mean, when I left the TRU team, Sergeant 16 Deane was still on the ground at his post, and had not 17 been relieved by the Barrie TRU team yet. I mean, you 18 know, he was still active and on duty when I left to go 19 to Sarnia to go home to get ready to go to Court. 20 Q: Now, you told Superintendent Parkin 21 as we saw, that he shouldn't hold his breath for the 22 charges ever sticking. 23 A: Right. 24 Q: You didn't give that indication to 25 Inspector Goodall, did you, that these charges were


1 fragile one might -- 2 A: No, he was -- 3 Q: -- say in that sense? 4 A: No, I -- no, sir, I'm, you know, 5 you're not taking me there. I didn't say the charges 6 were fragile. I explained to you why I said what I said 7 to Inspector -- Superintendent Parkin with respect to 8 that comment. And -- 9 Q: Yes, you -- 10 A: -- and -- and Goodall's -- Goodall's 11 a detective -- was a detective inspector. You know, I 12 knew, and I had worked with him; a very competent 13 individual, to say the least. You know, he was going to 14 conduct his investigation and do his job. 15 I was satisfied there were grounds. I am 16 satisfied today, based on what I knew at the time that 17 there were grounds. 18 Q: Ultimately, you learned, as you've 19 told us, that they were not -- 20 A: Ultimately -- 21 Q: -- near the incident? 22 A: -- right. 23 Q: Did you suggest -- 24 A: Well, I don't know if they were the - 25 - I just don't know, I don't know that. I don't know


1 where they were. 2 Q: Did you suggest there be any kind of 3 apology, at least, to these two (2) people, the brother 4 and sister of a person that had been killed who were -- 5 who had to find out about the death in custody, being 6 charged with attempted murder when they had no 7 involvement? 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 9 why -- that's a question to ask this witness at this 10 point. 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, I think it 12 sheds light on his attitude, Mr. Commissioner. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: His attitude of, 15 let's go get these fucking guys and so on. I think that 16 has to be taken into account. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You know, 18 I'm sure that that's -- 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, with great 20 respect, Mr. Commissioner -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes -- 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I think his 23 attitude is very important in this -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 25 All right. But I just don't see how that's going to help


1 me at this stage with what I have -- 2 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: It's based on the 3 answer, I would suggest. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 7 Q: Did you -- 8 A: The question is? 9 Q: Did you consider you had caused the 10 arrest of the brother and sister of a person who had been 11 killed, you caused them learning about the death while 12 they were in custody, themselves. 13 Did you ever consider suggesting that 14 there be some kind of formal apology or something to 15 those two (2) people after you learned that they hadn't 16 been involved? 17 A: Did I ever consider that? 18 Q: Did you ever suggest that? 19 A: No, I didn't. 20 Q: Did you ever -- okay, did you ever 21 consider it? 22 A: I -- no, I didn't. I'm -- like I 23 said, it's a very unfortunate thing, it's a tragic 24 incident. I'm not making light of it. I couldn't 25 imagine how those poor people would feel being in custody


1 when their brother is, you know, dying and they are 2 pulled away from him. 3 It's a tragic -- it's a tragic thing that 4 happened and I -- you know, it's -- it's a very 5 unfortunate set of circumstances. 6 And I don't have any problem saying, you 7 know, that I wish I had had more information. 8 Q: But you didn't investigate to get 9 more information? 10 A: Well, sir, I -- I acted in good faith 11 at the time, based on the information I had; that's what 12 police work is about. Sometimes, you know, you have to 13 act on what you have at the time and you have to act in 14 good faith. 15 And, you know, you make that call and then 16 -- and then you got to -- you have to justify that, as I 17 am here today, doing that. 18 You know, that's -- that's what police 19 work's all about. It's not the black and white. Many 20 times it's not black and white. 21 Q: With respect to the arrest of Marcia 22 Simon -- 23 A: Right. 24 Q: You told us on March 6th that you 25 understood that she was in custody as a result of a


1 pursuit? 2 A: Yeah. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: But then you -- you said you wanted 7 her released unconditionally, because you didn't want her 8 in custody at the Forest Detachment during what was going 9 on there. 10 A: Right. 11 Q: You recall that evidence? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: So you were afraid she might overhear 14 something, of what the officers were saying? 15 A: No, no. I just -- it was that, you 16 know, at some point, I think prior to that we had the 17 armed takedown at the Detachment and it was -- it was -- 18 I thought it was a dangerous place to be. 19 I just didn't want a civilian under arrest 20 -- there was no need for her to be there. I mean, we 21 didn't need her to be there. We didn't need anybody 22 under arrest. 23 If somebody would have brought an impaired 24 driver there, I would have had them out of there. Just - 25 - that was the last place we needed people in custody to


1 be at that time. 2 Q: And was it your understanding that 3 she had been charged with an offence at that point? 4 A: No, as I recall I -- I said to them, 5 You know we know who she is, we know what the offences 6 are, release her unconditionally and we can summons her 7 later. So nothing -- no information had been laid -- if 8 that's what you mean. 9 Q: And similarly to the situation with 10 respect to Pierre and Carolyn George did you subsequently 11 find out more about the nature of Marcia Simon's 12 involvement and in particular that she'd been trying to 13 call an ambulance? 14 A: No, sir, I didn't, I -- the last I 15 had to do with that lady is when the Con -- Detective 16 Constable Andre Clelland came and told me we had this 17 lady in custody and I made the call to get her released 18 immediately and drive her to where she needed to be. And 19 that was my concern at the time with respect to that 20 lady. 21 I don't even know if she -- she was 22 charged ultimately or not. I have no -- I have no idea. 23 Q: Now, you told us in your testimony, I 24 won't necessarily turn you to it but I shall if you want, 25 on February 23rd that in a pursuit the policy was that


1 there has to be a Communication Sergeant involved in 2 handling the pursuit; right? 3 A: That's my understanding. 4 Q: Yes, and that's because it's 5 recognized that police pursuits can be dangerous right? 6 A: Yeah, and -- and you know, sir, I -- 7 I could stand to be corrected, it's been a long time 8 since I've been behind a marked cruiser and in a uniform 9 and I don't know when that policy came in but -- and I 10 don't know if they have their lights on; that's when the 11 Communications Supervisor becomes involved or not but I - 12 - that was my understanding. 13 Q: And at the time it was your 14 understanding that if there was such a Communications 15 Sergeant handling it it it would have been Sergeant 16 Cousineau; is that correct? 17 A: No, I just asked if it was him. 18 Q: You asked if it was him? So -- 19 A: Right. He said no. 20 Q: He said no? 21 A: Right. 22 Q: So was there a Communications 23 Sergeant handling that pursuit? 24 A: I don't recall what -- because there 25 would be other -- those officers would also be handled by


1 the Comm Centre in Chatham; that's -- that would be for 2 lack of a better term Central Dispatch would be out of 3 Chatham. 4 So they -- they may where -- very well 5 have been managed by the Comm Centre sergeant in Chatham 6 and I think that's Tewksbury because his -- his name 7 comes up in the scribe notes. I think Sergeant Tewksbury 8 was the Comm Centre sergeant in Chatham that night. So 9 whether or not he did that or not I don't know. 10 Q: Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. Thank 11 you, Officer. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's it? 13 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 15 Mr. Rosenthal. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think Mr. 20 Scullion is up now. I think we should just carry on for 21 a while. Do you want to have a morning break now or do 22 you want to start now? 23 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I'd appreciate just 24 a couple of minute. I need to talk to your Counsel for 25 one (1) tape if that's all right.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Why don't we 2 take a morning break. It's a bit early but why don't we 3 do it now. We'll take a morning break. 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 5 for fifteen (15) minutes. 6 7 --- Upon recessing at 10:02 a.m. 8 --- Upon resuming at 10:15 a.m. 9 10 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 11 resumed. Please be seated. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 13 morning, Mr. Scullion. 14 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Good morning, Mr. 15 Commissioner. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What is your 17 current estimate of how long you might be? 18 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: My good news is I'm 19 probably still going to be around my estimate. My better 20 news is if I go a little bit over I'm told by my Mr. 21 Henderson that he's going to be less than his estimate so 22 I might -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Have you 24 discussed this with Mr. Henderson? 25 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I have. He -- he


1 said if I didn't raise the Chief's name too many times in 2 my cross that he'd be less time than he anticipates. 3 So I just -- I'll probably be close to 4 that timeframe. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I recognize the time 7 limits. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 9 very much. 10 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: We'll see what we 11 can do. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Carry on. 13 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: And I had spoken 14 with your Counsel about a tape. I still haven't 15 clarified if we've played it yet. It may or may not come 16 up but I'll just continue as I was and if it comes up 17 we'll -- we'll determine that at the time. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 21 Q: Good morning, Mr. Wright. 22 A: Good morning. 23 Q: My name's Kevin Scullion, I'm one (1) 24 of the counsel for the Residents of Aazhoodena. And, Mr. 25 Commissioner, I can let you know that I'm going to go


1 into a brand new topic right off the bat with one (1) 2 question. 3 Mr. Wright, do you have any connection in 4 your relationship with a Philip Wright or Grace Wright? 5 A: No. 6 Q: Not distant relatives in any way, 7 shape or form -- 8 A: No. 9 Q: -- of yours? I'm not done. 10 A: Unless you got news for me. 11 Q: I'm not done. That was just the 12 first topic. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Those are 14 names we haven't heard yet in this Inquiry, aren't they? 15 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: No, they -- they're 16 names that we haven't heard. They come up on a title 17 search of the Stoney Point reserve in around 1937 and 18 1942. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 20 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I thought it was an 21 issue I would just address very quickly at the outset. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 24 Q: Mr. Wright, I'll try to refer to you 25 by your current rank; it's Inspector, correct?


1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: And at the time, in 1995, you were 3 acting Detective Staff Sergeant. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: Since 1995, you've been promoted 6 twice, is that correct, to the level of inspector? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: All right. And I'm working from your 9 Tab 1 of Commission documents, your CV. And I just made 10 the assumption that there were two (2) lateral moves and 11 two (2) promotions since 1995. 12 A: Two (2) lateral moves, sure. 13 Q: You go from acting Detective to 14 Detective Sergeant, you're promoted to Detective Staff 15 Sergeant. You move to acting Detective Inspector, then 16 promoted to Inspector, sir. 17 A: Right. 18 Q: My understanding of two (2) lateral 19 moves and two (2) promotions at that time? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: That's correct. Up to 1995, did you 22 have any special training in dealing with Native issues? 23 A: Any special training? 24 Q: Training. 25 A: No.


1 Q: Okay. Have you had any since 1995? 2 A: No. 3 Q: At this point in time, like today's - 4 - I've been asked to clarify what I meant by special 5 training. From your CV, there's no indication of formal 6 training by way of course, method of study or otherwise, 7 of Native affairs; is that correct? 8 A: Right. 9 Q: Okay. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: As of today's date, you are holding 14 the same position as Inspector Carson had in 1995, 15 correct? 16 A: The same rank? 17 Q: Same rank. 18 A: Yeah. Yes. 19 Q: All right. So that if an incident 20 occurred today, there's a good possibility that you could 21 be an Incident Commander. 22 A: No, there couldn't be, be zero. I 23 don't have the Incident Commander course. 24 Q: All right. So but -- but for the 25 course, you are the same rank, same level as Inspector


1 Carson was in -- 2 A: At that time. Well, different -- it 3 was -- they're apples and oranges, quite frankly. He was 4 an Inspector, I'm a Detective Inspector. So, my area of 5 expertise is criminal investigation, major crime 6 investigation. 7 Q: Hmm hmm. 8 A: Where his necessarily wasn't. He was 9 -- and I think he was an acting Superintendent at that 10 time, actually, but his would be more support management. 11 Q: More along the lines of managing 12 major incident, as opposed to a criminal investigation? 13 A: Yeah. I was more -- I would think -- 14 I would say that a Detective Inspector is more frontline, 15 if that helps. I'm just trying to be accurate. 16 Q: I'm just trying to understand the 17 terminology used, both in your CV and throughout the 18 Inquiry -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- for ranks, a police -- 21 A: Well, you're asking me what I do now. 22 A Detective Inspector, I -- I'm called out to major 23 crimes and I manage major crime, predominantly homicide 24 investigations, where an Inspector necessarily would -- 25 would never do that.


1 A Detective Inspector would do that. 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: So they're -- you know, the 4 organization is very large and complex and there's lots 5 of different activities that officers do, and so my job 6 would be different than what Inspector Carson was doing 7 at the time. 8 I would be more akin to what Inspector 9 Goodall, Detective Inspector Goodall was doing. There's 10 the -- there's the closer analogy, than Inspector Carson. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 Q: Just following very quickly on a 15 point raised by Mr. Rosenthal. With regards to the three 16 (3) individuals who were arrested at the Strathroy 17 Hospital -- 18 A: Right. 19 Q: -- I take it a decision was made at 20 some point on the morning of September 7th to release 21 them without charges being laid, correct? 22 A: I think it was the afternoon of 23 September 7th. 24 Q: At some point on September 7th, that 25 decision --


1 A: Yeah, that's what I -- 2 Q: -- was made? 3 A: My -- I took from Mr. Rosenthal was 4 in the afternoon of September 7th, everybody was 5 released. 6 Q: All right. I take it from your 7 evidence that that wasn't your decision. 8 A: No, it was someone else's. 9 Q: Right. Do you know who made that 10 decision? 11 A: No, I don't. 12 Q: Now, in your position, up to 1995, 13 you were aware of Section 1 of the Police Services Act, 14 correct? 15 A: Can you help me a little bit? 16 Q: In particular -- 17 A: Not off the top of -- 18 Q: Sure. Section 5 (sic): 19 "The need for sensitivity to the 20 pluralistic multi-racial and multi- 21 cultural character of Ontario society." 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: You were aware of that at the time? 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: And you incorporated that into your


1 activities as a police officer? 2 A Sure. 3 Q: All right. And the difficulty that 4 I'm having, I'll be upfront, I'm listening to you 5 testifying today and I'm hearing you on these tapes, it 6 seems like they're a very different person on the tapes. 7 Would you agree that what's caught on tape 8 is very different from the testimony that you're giving 9 today? 10 A: With regard to what? Content? 11 Q: Okay. The words, the content, the 12 substance of what is caught on those tapes. 13 A: Well, I would agree it's different, 14 sure. 15 Q: All right. And at the time you knew 16 you were being tape recorded when you were making these 17 calls, correct? 18 A: No. 19 Q: You didn't know -- 20 A: Sometimes I did -- I really didn't 21 give it a whole lot of thought. Sometimes I did and 22 sometimes I thought I -- I wasn't being taped. 23 Clearly, when I was speaking to Linton -- 24 no, Parkin at one point, he says he wants to call me on a 25 secure line and we hang up and he calls me and we're not,


1 so. 2 Q: All right. So I take it you knew 3 there was a good chance you were being taped but it 4 wasn't guaranteed? 5 A: Okay, sure. Yeah, yeah. 6 Q: All right. And you're being taped 7 because it's important to have tapes of the discussions 8 that are going on during an incident in case there's any 9 review that takes place after the fact, correct? 10 A: Yeah. 11 Q: That's a purpose of the review. 12 A: Sure. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: Well and there's potentially evidence 15 in there as well, right? 16 Q: I agree. Would you agree with me 17 that notwithstanding the fact that you're being taped and 18 that it could be reviewed at a later date, you -- 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: -- your language as caught on these 21 tapes was totally inappropriate? 22 A: At times, sure. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: I've made that point, yeah. 25 Q: Okay. In terms of the expletives


1 that were used in a variety of instances. 2 A: Right. 3 Q: All right. And to a number of 4 different people including your superiors and a senior 5 lawyer with the Attorney General? 6 A: I don't understand what your question 7 is. 8 Q: Your language -- 9 A: Right. 10 Q: -- in your discussion with Inspector 11 Carson -- 12 A: Hmm hmm. 13 Q: -- Superintendent Parkin -- 14 A: Hmm hmm. 15 Q: -- Mr. McCabe, all included 16 expletives when you're describing various incidents that 17 are occurring. 18 A: Yes. I would agree with you. 19 Q: Okay. We've gone through a number of 20 these tapes, we've heard these tapes -- 21 A: Right. 22 Q: -- your use of certain terms occurs 23 more than twenty (20) times -- 24 A: Sure. 25 Q: -- in the course of about five (5) or


1 six (6) conversations over that evening. 2 A: Sure. 3 Q: Why are you using that terminology to 4 describe what's occurring at that time? 5 A: Well, sir, I mean, I don't know. I 6 guess -- I didn't give it a whole lot of thought. I was 7 talking to individuals, I was dealing with situations as 8 they came up. I used some profanity; is it -- is it 9 desirable in the workplace? No. I've made that comment. 10 Is it uncommon? No. It was a very 11 stressful situation. I was dealing with a multitude of 12 different things and I used profanity a number of times. 13 I guess my position would be when one uses 14 profanity, one has to be concerned about the person who's 15 at the other end of that and I knew Inspector Carson and 16 a number -- number of the other individuals and I didn't 17 concern myself that they may take that poorly. 18 Q: Inspector Carson -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- is higher in rank than you, 21 correct? 22 A: Yes, absolutely. 23 Q: Above him is Superintendent Parkin. 24 A: Right. 25 Q: Did you know Mr. McCabe --


1 A: No. 2 Q: -- before this event? 3 A: No. 4 Q: So you had no idea of who he was or 5 how he would take your phraseology? 6 A: Well that's -- agreed. 7 Q: You had no idea? 8 A: Right. 9 Q: Now, is this language that you used 10 typical for you in a stressful situation? 11 A: Well, I mean, we're talking ten (10) 12 years ago. So -- 13 Q: Ten (10) years ago was it typical? 14 A: -- I would say -- pardon me? 15 Q: Ten (10) years ago was it typical for 16 you to use that? 17 A: Did I use profanity? Sure. 18 Q: It wasn't out of the ordinary for you 19 to use that profanity? 20 A: No, it was not. 21 Q: Looking back on it, you'd agree with 22 me that it was totally inappropriate? 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 A: Sure, I wish I would have used other 2 terms, sure. Sure. 3 Q: At what point in time did you first 4 hear the tapes -- 5 A: Oh, I don't 6 Q: -- that we've heard in this Inquiry? 7 A: Maybe this summer. I don't -- 8 whatever was played at the Inquiry when Inspector -- 9 Deputy Commissioner Carson was here and in my preparation 10 for coming here to give evidence. 11 Q: Right. Before that you'd never heard 12 the tapes? 13 A: No, I don't think so, no. I -- 14 Q: Nobody in the -- nobody in the OPP 15 had ever brought these tapes to your attention before 16 this Inquiry began? 17 A: No. 18 Q: Has anyone in the OPP spoken to you 19 about the language that you used or that we hear on these 20 tapes? 21 A: No. 22 Q: At no point in time? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Now, we also hear in a conversation 25 that you have with Inspector Carson the night of


1 September 6th certain comments made by you about 2 Inspector Linton? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: I'd suggest to you that you were 5 being critical of the decisions or lack of decisions or 6 inability to make a decision by Inspector Linton -- 7 A: Right. 8 Q: -- and you were expressing that 9 criticism to Inspector Carson on the phone? 10 A: I would agree with you. 11 Q: Okay. Do you think that that's 12 appropriate -- 13 A: Absolutely. 14 Q: -- or it was appropriate behaviour? 15 A: Absolutely. At that particular time 16 absolutely, or I wouldn't have done it. 17 Q: I appreciate that you did it but 18 you're complaining about your immediate supervisor's 19 decision or lack of decision making ability -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- to Inspector Carson who at that 22 time is off duty, correct? 23 A: Well, no, I disagree with you. 24 Inspect -- I had a direct reporting relationship with 25 Inspector Carson. Inspector Linton was the night shift


1 officer, the CO. 2 Q: You didn't have a direct reporting 3 relationship -- 4 A: I had -- I -- I -- 5 Q: Was -- 6 A: He was there and he was an inspector 7 and, certainly, I would report to him but I had a direct 8 reporting relationship to Inspector Carson, directly. 9 Q: Inspector Linton was the one making 10 decisions -- 11 A: Right. 12 Q: -- after Inspector Carson left the 13 building? 14 A: That's right. 15 Q: Right? 16 A: But, Inspector Carson was the overall 17 commander of that incident. 18 Q: Agreed, but he'd left decision making 19 to Inspector Linton when he was gone, correct? 20 A: Right, agreed. 21 Q: Right. You were going behind 22 Inspector Linton's decision making or lack of decision 23 making to Inspector Carson? 24 A: I went -- well, sure you could call 25 it -- I don't -- no, I disagree with behind -- Linton was


1 right in the Command Post when I was talking to Carson 2 but I -- I mean, I certainly called Carson because I was 3 very concerned about what Linton was doing. 4 Q: Are you telling me that Linton -- 5 A: Actually that's wrong, Carson called 6 me. Carson called me. I was talking to Inspector Linton 7 and Carson called me at the Command Post and then I had a 8 telephone conversation with Inspector Carson. And during 9 that telephone call I explained to him my concern about 10 what I called or I described as 'waffling' and I've gone 11 into great detail about that -- 12 Q: Right. 13 A: -- with respect to what Linton was 14 doing because I was -- I was very concerned about -- 15 about just that point. 16 So I didn't go calling Carson, Carson 17 called looking for me. 18 Q: Right. So you see it as a different 19 situation depending on who made the call? 20 A: No, you -- you've -- you've suggested 21 to me that, unless I stand to be corrected, that I called 22 Carson and had -- and -- and made that point. Well, 23 that's not what happened. I was dealing with Inspector 24 Linton and Carson called me and I explained to Carson 25 which is my duty that I was very concerned about what it


1 was Inspector Linton was doing. 2 Q: Let's leave out who made the call. 3 A: Okay. 4 Q: Let's go directly to your comments. 5 My suggestion to you is you're criticizing Inspector 6 Linton's decision making or lack of decision making 7 directly to Inspector Carson, correct? 8 A: I take no issue with that. 9 Q: All right. 10 A: Right. 11 Q: I'm suggesting to you that it's 12 inappropriate for the second in command to do that and 13 that you should have brought up any concerns with 14 Inspector Linton? 15 A: No, I disagree with you, sir. 16 Q: This isn't the first time that you'd 17 dealt with Inspector Linton as an Incident Commander, 18 correct? 19 A: Right. 20 Q: You'd dealt with him less than six 21 (6) months earlier with the Daryl George incident -- 22 A: Right. 23 Q: -- on Kettle Point right? We've 24 heard testimony from the then chief of Kettle Point and 25 Stony Point Police Miles Bressette.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: All right. You remember Miles? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: Did you listen to his testimony at 5 this Inquiry regarding that incident? 6 A: No. 7 Q: All right. Are you aware of the -- 8 A: I'm aware of his testimony, yeah. 9 Q: And was it accurate? 10 A: No. 11 Q: All right. He testified that, with 12 respect to this incident, we've gone into a lot of detail 13 on this incident in the Inquiry, but a perimeter had been 14 set up, all right -- 15 A: Are we talk -- 16 Q: -- with TRU -- 17 A: Which incident are we talking about? 18 Q: Darryl George's -- 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: A perimeter had been set up by TRU 21 around a house that Darryl George was in. 22 A: Right. 23 Q: That was true, correct? 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: Yeah, okay.


1 A: An inner perimeter. 2 Q: An inner perimeter that nobody was 3 supposed to breach for safety reasons, right? 4 A: Right. 5 Q: And, in fact, people were breaching 6 that perimeter. Members of the Kettle Point and Stoney 7 Point First Nation -- 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: -- were breaching it -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: And it was causing concerns for you, 12 correct? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Okay. Safety concerns? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: All right. You had dealt with Miles 17 Bressette earlier with regards to surveillance or other 18 activities, so you were familiar with him, correct; 19 before the Darryl George incident? 20 A: I knew Miles, yeah. 21 Q: Okay. 22 A: Sure. 23 Q: All right. You expressed frustration 24 to him about this perimeter being breached, correct? 25 A: I was -- I expressed concern about


1 the perimeter being breached, yeah. 2 Q: Right. 3 A: I think -- 4 Q: It was a concern? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: It was a safety concern. 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: And you also expressed concern to 9 Miles Bressette that Inspector Linton was giving 10 directives that were also jeopardizing that safety as you 11 saw it? 12 A: Directive, yes. 13 Q: Right. 14 A: A specific directive, yes. 15 Q: Right. In particular, he was 16 directing people to arrest people that were breaching 17 that perimeter. 18 A: He was directing the TRU team to 19 effect arrests on the people who had breached the inner 20 perimeter. 21 Q: Right. 22 A: That was my concern. 23 Q: Fair enough. 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: You took issue with a directive that


1 he was giving -- 2 A: Right. 3 Q: -- in regards to that situation. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: Okay. You expressed that frustration 6 to Miles Bressette? 7 A: I think I expressed that concern to 8 Inspector Linton. 9 Q: Okay. Miles testified that you 10 expressed the following concern to him about Inspector 11 Linton was that he was not a field member -- 12 A: Hmm hmm. 13 Q: -- or field officer, he was an 14 administrative officer and he was more or less 15 incompetent to handle this particular situation. 16 Is that -- 17 A: I've read that and I disagree 18 completely with that. 19 Q: Mr. Bressette said that you asked him 20 if he could do anything to assist. 21 A: Disagree again. 22 Q: You didn't ask him for any assistance 23 whatsoever? 24 A: No. No, I did not. 25 Q: You're aware that Mr. Bressette


1 breached the protocol that was in place at that point in 2 time and effectively resolved the situation -- 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: -- in a non-violent manner? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: Right. And he was later taken to 7 task by the OPP about that breach of protocol, correct? 8 A: I didn't know that. I -- 9 Q: You were never involved in Mr. 10 Bressette's discipline? 11 A: No, not that I recall. I stand to be 12 corrected, but no, I didn't know he was disciplined. 13 Q: All right. You were never 14 disciplined yourself for anything in relation to the 15 Darryl George incident? 16 A: No. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: In regards to the mugs and t-shirts-- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- were you ever disciplined in any 23 way in relation -- 24 A: No. 25 Q: -- to that? Do you still have a mug?


1 A: No. 2 Q: Do you still have a t-shirt? 3 A: No. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Let me turn to a new topic. Project 8 Maple -- 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: -- we've heard from you in your 11 evidence in-chief that this Project Maple, which I have 12 as Exhibit P-424, you should have a copy before you. 13 A: Do you know what Tab that is? 14 Q: I'm not sure if it is a Tab or if it 15 was kept separate. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It is a Tab. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Tab 16. 21 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Tab 16, Mr. 22 Commissioner. 23 THE WITNESS: 16? 24 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 16. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes.


1 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Right. 2 THE WITNESS: Yes, I have it. 3 4 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 5 Q: And just for the record, I understand 6 it's P-424. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 11 Q: I just wanted to note I was right on 12 the exhibit number, Mr. Millar was wrong. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You've noted 14 that for the record. 15 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: That doesn't happen 16 very often. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 19 Q: Now, with respect to this Project 20 Maple, I understood your evidence that it was based on or 21 influenced, may be the better word, by an RCMP operations 22 manual or plan that came about as a result of a course 23 you attended? 24 A: Right. 25 Q: Is that fair?


1 A: Yeah, that's fair, yeah. Yeah. 2 Q: All right. That course was in the 3 summer presumably of 1995? And again, if it assists, I 4 see -- 5 A: Yeah I think it was in -- 6 Q: -- quer -- querying. If you go to 7 your Tab 1 -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- your CV lists a number of -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- courses and -- 12 A: 1995. 13 Q: That was before your surviving cross- 14 examination course? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: Right. 1995, major case management 17 course at the Canadian Police College in Ottawa. 18 A: Right. I -- my recollection, I just 19 -- I had -- I just come back from that not too awful long 20 before this incident. 21 Q: Okay. 22 A: So it would be -- I believe there was 23 snow on the ground my recollection is when I was in 24 Ottawa so. 25 Q: Before or after the Darryl George


1 incident? 2 A: Oh geez, I don't know. 3 Q: Even snow in Ottawa doesn't help you 4 with that, right? 5 A: That's right. I don't know, sir. 6 Sorry, I can't help you. 7 Q: Okay. My impression from this 8 Project Maple is it's much more -- there's much more 9 involvement from the OPP than had previously occurred or 10 taken place with respect to the Army Base. 11 A: I don't understand what that means. 12 Q: It's a much -- there's -- let me back 13 up a little bit. There was a plan in place for the OPP 14 for the occupation that was occurring at the Army Base, 15 correct? 16 A: Yeah, there was a policy, sure, there 17 was a policy. 18 Q: Well there's an operational plan that 19 we've entered into exhibit here with regards to the OPP 20 overseeing -- 21 A: There's an operational -- 22 Q: -- a Canadian Forces Base. 23 A: -- there's an operational plan? 24 Q: Maybe I can -- P-400. 25 A: Is it in a tab somewhere? Maybe I


1 have it. 2 Q: If I could ask the Registrar? P-400. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: It's Document Number 2002678. Do you 7 have that before you? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Is that -- is that something you've 10 seen before? 11 A: I just -- I -- I don't know. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: If I can just have a moment -- 14 Q: Take a moment to take a look at it. 15 A: Yeah. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 A: Do we know who the author of this is, 20 sir? 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's asking 22 if you know who the author is. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 25 Q: If the author isn't on the piece of


1 paper, I don't know who it is. However, I'm advised that 2 it's been entered into evidence during Inspector Carson, 3 Deputy Commissioner Carson's -- 4 A: Right. 5 Q: -- evidence that this was the 6 operational plan for the Base for the OPP for the period 7 1993 to 1995. 8 A: Okay. 9 Q: Does that come as a surprise to you? 10 A: I just don't recall it, sir. I don't 11 recall it. If Inspector Carson said it was our 12 operational plan, there's no doubt in my mind that it was 13 our operational plan. I just don't recall it. 14 Q: Well, you're taking a look at it 15 right now and I'd -- 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: -- ask you to take a few moments to 18 take a look at it and tell me whether or not that's 19 something you've seen before. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 THE WITNESS: I don't recall seeing this, 24 sir. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 2 Q: At all? 3 A: I have no recollection of that, no. 4 I mean, I know we had a policy and I know how we dealt 5 with it. I was the Detective Sergeant down there, but as 6 -- as -- any recollection of reading this particular 7 document, I just don't recall ever reading this document. 8 Q: Okay. We've heard taped 9 conversations between Inspector Carson and Superintendent 10 Parkin -- 11 A: Right. 12 Q: -- at the time that, as of September 13 5th and 6th, you fell back to the operational plan that 14 was previously in place. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Does that -- 17 A: Well, I'm not -- 18 Q: Is that consistent with your 19 recollection of what occurred on September 5th -- 20 A: September 5th and 6th. 21 Q: -- and 6th, 1995? 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, they didn't -- 23 they didn't actually -- I think the evidence was not that 24 they fell back on the operational plan. 25 The evidence was that they -- they fell


1 back to the checkpoints set out in the plan, and back -- 2 the original plan. 3 So that it's the location of the 4 checkpoints that they fell back to. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Post shooting. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Does that 10 accord with your recollection, Mr. Scullion? 11 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: It doesn't, but I'll 12 carry on my questions. It doesn't affect my questioning. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 15 Q: With respect to this Project Maple, I 16 suggest to you that it was a much more in your face, 17 confrontational approach to an occupation of the Park 18 than had been previously employed by the OPP with respect 19 to the Army Camp; is that fair? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 A: I don't know -- I don't know how I 24 can answer that, sir. I would say I didn't think it was 25 a very confrontational plan, Project Maple. It was to


1 contain and negotiate. I mean, I don't know how that's 2 confrontational. 3 And if I can help you with my input to 4 Project Maple, when I say I took that course in Ottawa at 5 CPC, that's in relation to page 2 of Project Maple, in 6 regards to the chart. 7 The -- the primary thing that I wanted to 8 bring to this was this flow of command and control to the 9 situation so that -- and I explained this in my evidence 10 in-chief, with regards to how the information would flow 11 up to the Incident Commander. 12 My -- my time at CPC in Ottawa with 13 respect to major case management didn't involve classroom 14 instruction in regards to land claims or anything that -- 15 anything that happens after that page 2, is not pursuant 16 to major case management that I took at Ottawa, other 17 than the reporting system that we had and the flow of -- 18 of information vis-a-vis control and command of that 19 situation. 20 Not the actual manner in which we were 21 going to police that incident; that was Inspector 22 Carson's call. 23 Q: All right. And -- 24 A: The manner in which we were going to 25 police that.


1 Q: That clarifies part of the evidence 2 that I had from your examination-in-chief. You're saying 3 page 2, the way this was organised was from the course 4 but the rest was as a result of the series of 5 discussions, presumably, leading up to September of 1995? 6 A: Yeah. Major case management course 7 was basically a -- a senior homicide course, how to 8 manage a senior -- a major homicide or a missing person 9 or something like that where large numbers of people are 10 involved and how to deal with it, not a land claim issue. 11 Q: Right. And I see from the chart on 12 page 2, you're listed as CIT, Commander Assistant -- 13 A: Right. 14 Q: -- second in charge to Inspector 15 Carson. And I take it that one of the primary roles for 16 you was the vetting of information, the screening of 17 information so they only got what was important for 18 decision-making purposes? 19 A: No. No, it wouldn't -- I appreciate 20 it may appear that way, but it was more of refereeing, as 21 you -- I guess would be a good term, as far as who's 22 coming through the door to see the Inspector, because as 23 I described earlier, you don't want a constable from an 24 ERT team roadblock, coming to see the Inspector. 25 That information should come up through


1 the -- his ERT team sergeant and then across to the 2 Inspector. So I was there to make sure that that flow of 3 information came to him. Like, nothing came to me and 4 stopped at me and didn't go -- it wasn't my job to decide 5 okay, Well, he can't -- he doesn't need to hear that or 6 he doesn't -- he does or he doesn't need to hear that. 7 It was more of, you know, next in line or 8 if he was busy on the phone I would take that information 9 and then give it immediately to him when he was done. 10 Q: Right. You're about ten (10) 11 questions down the road. 12 A: Okay. 13 Q: What I was asking is whether or not 14 one (1) of your roles, and I may have put it as primary 15 but one (1) of the secondary roles was to make sure that 16 the information that was getting to Inspector Carson was 17 information that he would need to make his decisions. 18 There was a certain vetting under the Act? 19 A: No, I said there was no vetting. 20 Q: No vetting -- 21 A: He was -- he was -- the information 22 that came through the Command Post, that came to me, got 23 to Carson. 24 Q: But it was your job to ensure that 25 whatever got to the Command Post to go to Carson was what


1 he needed to make his decisions? 2 A: No, the information -- if somebody 3 felt that they needed information to get to Carson, then, 4 you know, it got to Carson. And, you know, you look at 5 this model, you have to understand we're in a command 6 post and John Carson and I are no farther than you and I 7 are at the -- the worst of times. 8 So, you know, somebody coming in and 9 providing information, it's not like he was in one (1) 10 part of a huge area and I was in another and he wasn't 11 getting that information, we were pretty well beside each 12 other as with the rest of these people, all the time. 13 So that wasn't my primary function, 14 although it was certainly one (1) of them. 15 Q: Right. I appreciate that and I took 16 it from primary to being one (1) of your functions, but 17 I'm trying to determine how it was that all of the 18 information, and there was a vast amount of information 19 coming towards the Command Post -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- that only that -- what was 22 important for him to make his decisions was getting 23 through to him. 24 A: Right. 25 Q: And I'm trying to determine how that


1 process was working. 2 A: Well, I think I just answered your 3 question, I said that's not what happened. There wasn't 4 a vetting of information and if you look at the scribe 5 notes you'll see that every hour or so we met. And all 6 the people who were those, what I like to call Unit 7 Heads, talked and we had a meeting with regards to what 8 we knew and what we may be doing later 9 So -- and it was incumbent upon those 10 people that had the information fed to them from the 11 people that were subordinate to them, were working under 12 their area vis-a-vis the sheet. 13 So it was very simply done. We -- the 14 people who were involved, the principals, met on an 15 hourly basis and whenever Inspector Carson felt it 16 necessary to. 17 Q: Right. My impression was that you 18 had a significant and important role in this 19 organizational chart; is that fair? 20 A: Okay, sure. I -- 21 Q: You -- 22 A: -- I -- I think you're overstating it 23 but I -- I take no issue that I was the 2IC to John or 24 his assistant or whatever you want to call it, his right- 25 hand person, whomever. But those other individuals,


1 those unit heads, they had unfettered access to Inspector 2 Carson at any time that they needed to speak to him. And 3 they certainly didn't need to go through me to go speak 4 to John. 5 Q: Right. You were -- your shifts were 6 twelve (12) hour shifts, correct? 7 A: Right. Well, probably more than 8 that, but, yeah. 9 Q: Right. Give or take? Twelve and a 10 half (12 1/2), eleven and a half (11 1/2)? 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: They're in about twelve (12) hour 13 shifts. You had no replacement? 14 A: Right. 15 Q: Why not? 16 A: Well, good question. 17 Q: That's why I asked. 18 Q: Probably, in hindsight, should have, 19 but I was there as Inspector Carson's 2IC; Carson's 2IC, 20 not Linton's 2IC. So when you have Carson's 2IC with 21 respect to the Ipperwash incident, well now you have a 22 land claim issue and you have a night shift incident 23 commander. 24 There's really no -- there was no -- and 25 there still isn't any kind of situation where you have


1 somebody doing what I was doing at that -- in -- in an 2 incident command situation. It was just unique because 3 Carson was in London and I was in the area. 4 And I was there and I had the background 5 because I'd been there for three (3) years or whatever, 6 so I had a -- a fairly intimate understanding of what was 7 going on there. And we had this very positive working 8 relationship, Inspector Carson and I, and I -- and that's 9 -- that's how it happened. 10 But when I went off there wasn't somebody 11 that took my place because there wasn't somebody who had 12 that body of knowledge because there was only one (1) 13 detective sergeant in the area and that was me. 14 Q: Right. But I appreciate that it was 15 more than a matter of convenience that you were second in 16 command to John Carson. 17 You played a role and it was important for 18 you to be there second in charge, correct? 19 A: Sure. 20 Q: But there was no replacement for you 21 on the night shift so to speak? 22 A: Right. 23 Q: Was that a conscious decision that 24 was made or do you just not have anybody to take over for 25 the night shift?


1 A: I don't think -- I -- well, you'd 2 have to ask Inspector Carson about that I guess. But -- 3 because he was running the show but my position would be 4 again that I was there in that position because of my 5 knowledge and background of what had taken place. 6 And again, you know, two (2) second in 7 command, I mean there were -- Staff Sergeant Dennis 8 outranked me there. And if Staff Sergeant Dennis told me 9 to do something, then I would do it because he was senior 10 to me. 11 I was an Acting Staff Sergeant at the 12 time. So, you know, assistant, second in command, 13 whatever you want to call it but there's still a rank 14 structure going on there. 15 Q: I appreciate that but that's 16 completely separate to my question to you which is, there 17 was no replacement for you, was that by conscious 18 decision or is it just the way it worked because there 19 was nobody else with your kind of experience? 20 A: I would say because there was nobody 21 else with my experience -- 22 Q: All right. And you'd -- 23 A: -- type of experience. 24 Q: -- you'd appreciate by not having a 25 night-shift person --


1 A: Right. 2 Q: -- who you would turn your duties 3 over to, there was no debriefing going on between you and 4 another person in your position, correct? 5 A: No, because there wasn't a position - 6 - that's right, that's right. 7 Q: Right. It couldn't happen. 8 A: Right. 9 Q: Right. So when you weren't there -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- the body of information that you 12 had wasn't available to Inspector Linton? 13 A: Agreed. 14 Q: Right? Unless you were called or you 15 came back in in the morning? 16 A: Sure. 17 Q: Correct? Okay. Now this 18 cohabitation approach in Project Maple -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- whose idea was that? 21 A: Carson's. 22 Q: Did you play a factor in that 23 decision at all? 24 A: No. My recollection is this was what 25 we were going to do --


1 Q: Was there any discussion about the 2 fact that this cohabitation arrangement that was going on 3 in the Base for the last two (2) years -- 4 A: Right. 5 Q: -- was pretty unsuccessful? 6 A: I disagree. I thought we were very 7 successful. 8 Q: With the cohabitation that was 9 occurring on the Base? 10 A: With the First Nations people and the 11 -- and the military? For quite some time, yeah. I mean, 12 I think it was a very difficult situation but all in all, 13 it was fairly reasonable, fairly successful. 14 At -- at a certain point the occupiers 15 take the entire Base but we didn't have any -- a large 16 number of violence or anything like that other than 17 perhaps the -- the helicopter shooting which I would 18 think is a, you know, an isolated incident. 19 Q: You also testified that this 20 Ipperwash Project Maple is very different from the 21 Serpent Mounds situation. Do you recall -- 22 A: As I understood that, yeah. 23 Q: All right. Where did your 24 understanding come from about Serpent Mounds? 25 A: I don't recall. I was -- I was --


1 Q: Do you recall speaking with anybody 2 within the OPP about the approach of the OPP to the 3 possible occupation of Serpent Mounds Provincial Park? 4 A: No, no. No, I don't. 5 Q: All right. So in your discussions 6 and I note that there was a fairly significant discussion 7 that took place at the end of August, the start of 8 September, about Project Maple. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: There was no discussion with anybody 11 else within the OPP about what might be going on with 12 respect to the Serpent Mounds occupation? 13 A: Not that I'm aware of. Not with me. 14 Q: I'm asking for your information -- 15 A: Not with me. 16 Q: -- your testimony, you never talked 17 with anybody -- 18 A: No. 19 Q: -- within the OPP about that possible 20 occupation? 21 A: No, no. 22 Q: So does that help or hinder where you 23 got any information about Serpent Mounds from? 24 A: No. 25 Q: How do you know it was different?


1 A: I don't -- I don't recall where I -- 2 where I got the information. I was alive to the fact of 3 Serpent Mound but I just -- I don't remember where. 4 Q: Well you also testified that your 5 view, your understanding was that Serpent Mounds, the 6 Provincial Park, was owned by the First Nation. 7 A: Yeah, I think so. Owned or leased, 8 yes. I thought -- yes. 9 Q: All right. You appreciate that that 10 was incorrect? 11 A: I -- I don't really know, sir. 12 Q: All right. Well I'm going -- I don't 13 suggest to you that it's -- 14 A: Sure. 15 Q: -- absolutely incorrect. 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: 27 percent was owned by the First 18 Nation, 73 percent was owned by the Province. 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: And they leased the rest -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- under an expired lease at the 23 time. 24 A: I think I made the point that there 25 was some kind of leasing agreement that they were in


1 conflict with, was my evidence, something along that 2 line. 3 Q: Right. Do you think that it would 4 have been important, looking back on it, ten (10) years 5 ago -- 6 A: Hmm hmm. 7 Q: -- that there had been some 8 discussion in the OPP about how to manage both of these 9 possible occupations? 10 A: I don't know that there wasn't. 11 Q: So you can't say if it would have 12 been a good idea if there was? 13 A: They are different -- 14 Q: Fair enough -- 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: Fair enough. We understand, I've 17 asked that question of a number of officers of the OPP, 18 and there wasn't any discussion. 19 A: Right. 20 Q: In your position now, looking back on 21 it, do you think it would have been helpful? 22 A: I think everything would have been 23 helpful, yes. 24 Q: All right. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: Now, I'm going to suggest to you that 4 the idea of the co-habitation -- 5 A: Hmm hmm. 6 Q: -- arrangement was in part, because 7 as you've testified, you viewed it as successful on the 8 Army Base, but in part it was to satisfy the view of the 9 public at that time that they were getting policing from 10 the OPP in the area? 11 A: No. 12 Q: That had no -- not bearing -- 13 A: Not for me. 14 Q: All right. Did that have any bearing 15 for you on the activity on the night of September 4th, 16 when the OPP tried to prevent the occupation from 17 occurring? 18 A: I don't understand your question. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I'm 23 not sure. Are you going to ask -- 24 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I think if I asked 25 it again, the objection would stay, but I'm moving on.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 2 moving on? So are you -- you're moving on to -- that's 3 fine. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Well, maybe I will 8 go back to it. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, if 10 you're going to go back to it, then there's an objection. 11 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I'm going to ask the 12 question and then we'll listen -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 14 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: -- to the objection 15 to the question I'm going to ask. It's not the same 16 question. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 19 Q: I asked Superintendent Parkin about 20 the activities on September 4th. 21 A: Right. 22 Q: And his answer to me, and I'll read 23 it for you and see if you agree with his answer: 24 "We, and everybody knew in the 25 community that the Provincial Park may


1 be occupied on the Labour Day weekend. 2 Had we not been seen to be doing 3 anything, we would have had the rest of 4 the community upset and it would have 5 only supported their position that they 6 were getting no policing from the OPP." 7 A: Well, I didn't think -- that didn't 8 occur to me on September 4th, and I don't know that -- I 9 mean, Superintendent Parkin that's who you've quoted, 10 correct? 11 Q: That's correct. 12 A: Is entitled to his opinion as well, 13 but I -- I wasn't of the understanding that the community 14 knew that they were going to take the Park on that day, 15 that's -- I knew we had a pretty good idea that they were 16 going to do that, but I didn't know that was public 17 knowledge. 18 Q: Okay. I'm not getting into whatever 19 the community knew, just what you knew. 20 A: Well, that's -- that's part of the 21 quote you've given me, sir, so I was responding to your - 22 - you asked me if I agreed with what Parkin said, so I 23 was -- 24 Q: Fair enough. 25 A: -- responding.


1 Q: Okay. You were aware of criticisms 2 from the community about the OPP policing of the area -- 3 A: Sure, yes -- 4 Q: -- before September 4th? 5 A: Yeah. Well, I went to meetings about 6 that, yes. 7 Q: Right. You were aware of that 8 criticism? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: All right. Did that criticism play 11 any role in the planning -- 12 A: Not for me. 13 Q: -- of Operation -- 14 A: Not for me. 15 Q: Of Project Maple? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Okay. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Did it play any role in the 22 activities for the OPP, at least the ones that you were 23 involved in on September 5th or 6th, the criticisms that 24 you received from the community about policing? 25 A: Well, I guess the -- when -- I was


1 concerned about the -- I guess, yes, and with respect to 2 the meeting that I had with the people down at the MNR 3 parking lot, I was concerned about what they might do. 4 Q: Right. The criticism from the 5 community was always an issue -- 6 A: I was aware of that. 7 Q: -- that -- 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: You were aware of it. 10 A: Yeah. 11 Q: It didn't direct you in your 12 operations, but it was a factor in what was being done at 13 the time? 14 A: Well, I -- no, I -- it wasn't a 15 factor it was -- certainly we were aware. I mean how 16 could you not be aware that the public was concerned but 17 I don't -- well, for me it wasn't a factor with respect 18 to what we did. 19 Q: All right. As of 9:00 p.m. on 20 September the 4th -- 21 A: Okay. 22 Q: -- the idea of cohabitation with the 23 occupiers of the Park had failed, correct? 24 A: Agreed. 25 Q: All right. The OPP had moved back


1 into a position of containment -- 2 A: Right. 3 Q: -- and simple negotiation, correct? 4 A: Right. Attempting to negotiate. 5 Q: Attempted negotiations and we'll get 6 into that in a second. 7 A: Right. 8 Q: Your view that co-habitation was 9 still possible -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- and possibly should be tried again 12 was rejected by Inspector Carson, correct? 13 A: I disagree. I disagree with you. 14 Q: Which part do you disagree with? 15 A: I disagree with that I thought it was 16 possible and he disagreed with me; that's not what took 17 place. 18 Q: Did you think it was possible? 19 A: I had -- somebody asked me that 20 earlier, I think it was Mr. Rosenthal, and I said I 21 thought it was very -- very unlikely as of early morning 22 September 5th. 23 Q: Well, it comes up a number of times 24 in the tapes -- 25 A: Right.


1 Q: -- and in the minutes -- 2 A: Right. 3 Q: -- that you're considering 4 repopulating the Park? 5 A: Well, I take issue with a number of 6 times. We're talking about 09:25 hour meeting on 7 September the 5th. There's a discussion with respect to 8 cohabitating the Park and -- and that goes in with the 9 helicopter and Robertson, et cetera, et cetera, but that 10 wasn't -- I wasn't leading that discussion, sir, that 11 was Inspector Carson leading that discussion. 12 Q: You were part of that discussion? 13 A: Absolutely I was. 14 Q: That -- that discussion involved 15 repopulating the Park. 16 A: Agreed. 17 Q: The idea of repopulating the Park. 18 A: Agreed. 19 Q: That was an idea that you thought 20 might still be possible as of 09:25 the morning of 21 September 5th? 22 A: Sure, yeah, potentially, yeah. 23 Q: And if possible -- 24 A: I thought that might be possible, 25 yes.


1 Q: -- if possible, i.e., there's nobody 2 in the Park or there's very few and you can arrest them 3 that repopulation would still be possible, right? 4 A: That was -- I was in agreement with 5 Inspector Carson's -- yeah, that's right. 6 Q: Right. 7 A: It was -- but you know I want to make 8 it clear that this -- that was his decision, his 9 contingency planning that was taking place. I was not 10 leading that discussion. 11 Q: I appreciate that but you're part of 12 these discussions. 13 A: Absolutely. 14 Q: You play a role in these discussions. 15 A: Agreed. 16 Q: You testified in-chief and on cross 17 that your opinion is important; you're not a "yes" man, 18 right? 19 A: Agreed. 20 Q: So you're playing a role in these 21 discussions? 22 A: Agreed. 23 Q: Right. Your role in this particular 24 discussion is identifying the possibility of repopulating 25 the Park --


1 A: No. 2 Q: -- if possible. 3 A: No. Read the -- you know read the 4 minutes. My role in that meeting is I'll -- Mark, go see 5 if you can get the helicopter so it can be here and my 6 position was well, if we're going to do this we want to 7 be doing it before four o'clock in the afternoon; that 8 was my role in that discussion and it's you know it's in 9 the -- it's in the scribe notes. It's... 10 Q: I understand that and I'm not talking 11 about your role I'm talking about your input. 12 A: Well, it's one (1) and the same is it 13 not? 14 Q: Did you have any input? 15 A: Well, I -- again it's in the scribe 16 notes, sir. 17 Q: So if it's not in the scribe notes 18 you had no input on that issue whatsoever? 19 A: Well, I -- I suspect, sir, that if I 20 had something to say that was noteworthy it would have 21 been in the scribe notes. My -- again my recollection is 22 -- is you know it's ten (10) years old but that's -- I 23 mean the -- the conversation flows pretty reasonably in 24 the notes as to what's taking place and who's saying 25 what.


1 I'm not taking issue with the fact that we 2 were contingency planning for the Park. I mean I don't 3 disagree with you I'm just trying to be very accurate 4 with respect to my -- my involvement in that. It's not 5 that I disagreed with that contingency planning on 6 September 5 at 09:25 because I didn't disagree with that. 7 Q: Right. Was the decision made as you 8 say at the 09:25 meeting -- 9 A: Right. 10 Q: -- not to try and co-habit the Park 11 again? 12 A: Was the -- no, I don't think it was 13 made, no. 14 Q: When was that decision made? 15 A: Well, it was -- again it was 16 contingency planning, sir, so I think what we were doing 17 there, there was a discussion if the -- if it presented 18 itself we were going to do that and we didn't know how 19 many people were in the Park and we just never visited 20 that again. We never visited that option again that I'm 21 aware of that -- well, I'm sure we didn't that day. 22 So you know that would be Carson to bring 23 that up, if he wanted to do that again, and we didn't 24 talk about it. 25 Q: So the option remained alive to


1 repopulate the Park? 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 A: Well, in my mind, as of the -- 6 September 5 by the, you know, mid-morning, I didn't think 7 was -- I didn't think that was a -- a -- any great 8 possibility of taking place, but again, it wasn't my 9 call. 10 If that was going to happen Carson would 11 have brought it up and I would have given my input. 12 Q: It remained a possibility, correct? 13 A: In my mind? I think I've answered 14 that. I don't know -- 15 Q: The answer is yes. It remained a 16 possibility in your mind -- 17 A: Was -- 18 Q: -- to repopulate the Park. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 A: I didn't give it any thought, but I - 23 - I guess I don't have a -- take issue with that, sure. 24 Q: In your mind, the decision hadn't 25 been made not to go back into the Park as of 09:25 --


1 A: As of 09:25 -- 2 Q: -- the morning -- 3 A: I agree with you. 4 Q: -- of September 5th. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: So when was that decision made, in 7 your mind, that you weren't going to go back into the 8 Park? 9 A: Well, we -- we never decided to -- he 10 didn't -- he didn't talk about going into the Park, he 11 talked about the possibility of going into the Park and 12 we were contingency planning. 13 It was never a go, wouldn't be a go until 14 we decided it was going to be a go. 15 Q: Right. It was -- 16 A: So -- 17 Q: -- always a contingency that you 18 could go back -- 19 A: At that particular time -- 20 Q: -- into the Park? 21 A: Yeah. At that particular time. 22 Q: All right. And when did that 23 particular time, as you describe it, end? 24 A: I don't know. 25 Q: September 5th?


1 A: Well, I don't -- I don't know, sir. 2 Q: Did it end at some point that day, 3 that you made the decision you're not -- 4 A: I didn't make the decision. 5 Q: -- going to go back into the Park? 6 A: I -- 7 Q: Was the decision made, with or 8 without you? 9 A: I don't recall that ever being made. 10 Q: Okay. 11 A: I think it was understood that we 12 weren't going to do it. 13 Q: That's what you understood. 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: And when did you understand that to 16 be the case? 17 A: Well we just never brought it up. I 18 don't know exactly the time, sir. We just -- it was 19 never brought up again later that day. Other things 20 happened. I was sent down to try to negotiate with those 21 people and other things occurred and we just never talked 22 about it again. 23 My sense was there was a lot of activity 24 in the Park and it was unreasonable to try to populate 25 it, based on what was going on within the boundaries of


1 the Park. 2 Q: The discussion about repopulating the 3 Park never came up again after 09:25 on September 5th, 4 correct? 5 A: I don't think so. I stand to be 6 corrected, but I don't think so. 7 Q: To the best of your recollection -- 8 A: As I said -- 9 Q: -- you never discussed it again? 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 A: Right. To the best of my 14 recollection, unless it's somewhere in here. No, I don't 15 recall discussing it again. 16 Q: And that's as close as we can come, 17 from your evidence, as to whether or not a decision had 18 been made to go back into the Park; is that fair? 19 A: Sure, yeah, okay, as far as my 20 evidence is concerned, yeah. 21 Q: All right. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: Just the last point on the view of


1 the public. I suggest to you that the use of the 2 roadblocks, the use of ERT teams -- 3 A: Hmm hmm. 4 Q: -- with a visible presence was 5 partially influenced by the fact that it would appease 6 community concerns about whether or not there was 7 policing going on. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: No, I don't think so. 12 Q: It wasn't part of the operation plan 13 from 1993 through 1995, with regards to the Army Camp, 14 correct? 15 A: It wasn't. 16 Q: It was not. 17 A: Agreed. 18 Q: It was part of the operational plan, 19 Project Maple now -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- with regards to the occupation of 22 the Park. 23 A: It was, to have the checkpoints, yes. 24 Q: Right. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: And I suggest to you that having a 4 visible presence, at that point in time, was important 5 for the OPP. 6 A: Right. Specifically with respect to 7 the occupiers. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 Q: And with respect to the occupation of 12 the Park that was occurring. 13 A: Right. 14 Q: Right. 15 A: Vis-a-vis the occupiers. 16 Q: It was to show the local community 17 that you were policing the situation. 18 A: Well, I think that -- that certainly 19 happened, but I don't think that that was a means to an 20 end. 21 Q: It was a concern that the public had 22 raised with you, and it was a concern that you were 23 addressing by having such a visible presence of OPP 24 officers in the area. 25 A: Sir, we used -- in my opinion, we


1 used the high visibility officers and the road -- the 2 checkpoint system as a result of what was taking place in 3 the Park. That's why we did what we did there. 4 Not to appease or -- in my opinion, 5 because of a -- of a concern with respect to how we may 6 look in the community. That was a policing action done 7 with respect to the situation and we dealt with it the 8 way we -- we saw fit. 9 Now, obviously the community is going to 10 be aware that we're there, and I said that, that where 11 was an overwhelming police presence September 5, '95 but 12 that wasn't -- that didn't motivate, me, anyways, as far 13 as I was concerned, why we were doing what we were doing. 14 We're doing that as a result of what had 15 taken place within the boundaries of the Park. 16 Q: Right, because the occupation of the 17 Park was so very different from the occupation of the 18 Army Camp? 19 A: Right. 20 Q: Right. 21 A: I think -- you know, sir, I think you 22 look -- if you have a look at the pho -- the mere 23 photographs that had been shown here, when I'm down at 24 the Park negotiating or attempting to talk to people with 25 Seltzer and Kobayashi, I have a bullet proof vest on.


1 And when I get in the car and I drive up 2 and I speak to the -- Mr. Manning up at CFB Ipperwash, I 3 don't have my vest on anymore. You know it's two (2) 4 kilometres down the road but it was a -- it was a whole 5 different atmosphere at CFB Ipperwash. 6 And that's the same day, moments later. 7 There's no need for me to be wearing a vest talking to 8 somebody at the CFB Ipperwash; it was a completely 9 different situation. And you need only look at the 10 photographs to see that. 11 Q: Let's go to that topic. In terms of 12 intelligence, the purpose of intelligence was to gather 13 as much information as you could on the people that are 14 occupying the Base, correct? 15 A: The Park. 16 Q: And the Park. 17 A: Yeah. The Park, we're concerned 18 about the Park. 19 Q: All right. So the role of 20 intelligence, at this point in time, under Project Maple, 21 was to gather as much information as possible about the 22 people occupying the Park. 23 A: Yeah, and they'd have -- to be fair, 24 they'd have to go through the Base, so -- 25 Q: Right. And a lot of that --


1 A: -- was taken. 2 Q: All right. A lot of that information 3 that you are now using for background on the people 4 occupying the Park, was information you'd already 5 gathered on people who had been occupying the camp, the 6 Base, correct? 7 A: I don't know because I didn't have a 8 lot to deal with the intelligence part of that, that -- 9 that information that Bell was bringing in. I really 10 didn't have a lot to do with Detective Sergeant Bell vis- 11 a-vis the information he was bringing in. 12 Q: Did -- 13 A: That really didn't go through me. 14 Q: Did Sergeant Bell take that 15 information directly to Inspector Carson? 16 A: Well it didn't go through me, yeah, 17 that's my understanding. That's -- that's how I recall 18 it. 19 Q: Did it go directly to Inspector 20 Carson or did Mr. Bell -- 21 A: Right. 22 Q: -- Detective Inspect -- 23 A: Sergeant. 24 Q: -- Detective Sergeant Bell report to 25 anybody in this chain of command?


1 A: I thought he went to Carson. And 2 sometimes it wouldn't be Bell, it would be -- I recall a 3 Detective Constable that was working for Bell would bring 4 the information to the command post. 5 Q: Right. Well you drafted this 6 organization chart at page 2, right? 7 A: Right. 8 Q: Well who was managing the 9 intelligence -- 10 A: Bell. 11 Q: -- under this operation? 12 A: Bell. 13 Q: Bell was? 14 A: Right. 15 Q: All right. 16 A: September 4, 5, 6, yeah. 17 Q: Right. Well that's where I'm 18 focussed. 19 A: Okay. 20 Q: September 4, 5, 6 -- 21 A: Okay, all right. Bell. 22 Q: All right. There's reference in the 23 notes and one of the tapes to a photo book having been 24 produced. Were you aware of that photo book? 25 A: No.


1 Q: You had no idea there was a photo 2 book? 3 A: No, I don't. 4 Q: All right. You can't tell us what 5 was in that photo book? 6 A: No, I don't. I -- 7 Q: Or whose photos were in that book? 8 A: No. 9 Q: You didn't look at a photo book 10 before you went to try and negotiate with any -- 11 A: No, no. 12 Q: There's reference in Project Maple to 13 videos, Polaroids, the use of video equipment for 14 incidents, for arrests. 15 A: Right, right. 16 Q: Do you know why there -- there's no 17 video and no Polaroids, no pictures of any of the 18 incidents or arrests that occurred? 19 A: No. Well I think the video and the 20 photographs that you're talking are with respect to the 21 crime package under the assumption that we were going to 22 make arrests and bring them back to Forest. 23 So the cameras and that kind of stuff was 24 going to be there and that's obviously not what happened. 25 As far as the video is concerned there wasn't an Ident


1 officer at the hospital with a video camera at the time 2 the arrests were made. 3 Q: Let's not go to the hospital, let's 4 stay with September 5th and 6th. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: A number of incidents occurred in the 7 parking lot -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- beside the Park none of which was 10 videoed correct? 11 A: Agreed. 12 Q: Right. 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Do you know why? 15 A: No, I don't. I thought -- 16 Q: All right. You can't shed any light 17 on that? 18 A: Well, I thought Evans was behind Marg 19 and I. Constable Evan -- Evans was an Ident officer. I 20 thought there was an officer videoing frankly, sir, 21 behind Marg and I and I thought there was one (1) there 22 when Seltzer and I were down there but apparently they 23 weren't. I thought they were. That's -- 24 Q: When did you learn that they weren't 25 there?


1 A: Well, I've never seen any video of 2 that. I've seen photographs but they're only from the 3 press; they're not our photographs that I know of, OPP 4 photographs. 5 Q: All right. So you had no idea while 6 you were there at the fence line -- 7 A: Right. 8 Q: -- that there were no pictures being 9 taken, no video being taken, and no record being kept of 10 what was happening other than pictures that the press 11 would take? 12 A: Well, I was aware -- I mean that 13 would be part of our record. Our -- the OPP has a Media 14 Relations Branch where, I mean, for us to stand there and 15 be talking to somebody and there's also some media back 16 there, we would have captured back in Orillia all that 17 media footage. 18 So I mean whether it was an OPP camera or 19 a you know CTV camera, the fact of the matter is those 20 images were -- were captured and -- and I suspect we 21 would have had them. 22 Q: You took no steps to ensure that 23 there was photographs taken or video taken of any 24 incidents that you were involved in? 25 A: No, no.


1 Q: Or any incidents that you were aware 2 of taking place? 3 A: Well, I -- I had -- we had quite a 4 discussion on September 6th, the night of September 6th 5 when the CMU was going to move down and we wanted to take 6 video down there and actually Constable Evans volunteered 7 to go down there with a video camera but the problem with 8 that was we didn't have the equipment to protect him 9 sufficiently and he didn't have -- it didn't have night 10 vision capability so we didn't do that. 11 So that was one (1) time that we certainly 12 had great discussion about that and it was unfortunate 13 you know in hindsight that we didn't send him down there 14 just with audio. 15 Q: Sure. It would have been nice to 16 have. 17 A: Absolutely it would have been. 18 Q: But there are OPP cars back in 1995 19 that had video capabilities. 20 A: There -- sir, you know, very, very 21 few. I know of one (1); it was in Sombra. 22 Q: So that's a yes? 23 A: One (1) car. 24 Q: There was a car available with video 25 capability?


1 A: I don't know if it was working or 2 not. 3 Q: Right. There's reference in the 4 notes to a car with video capability. 5 A: That's in -- yeah, at the Matheson 6 Drive. 7 Q: And that's the one you're referring 8 to? 9 A: Right. 10 Q: The one in Sombra. 11 A: Right. 12 Q: But you didn't know if it worked or 13 not? 14 A: Well, no, I'm just saying that there 15 was one (1) car that had it, period, one (1) cruiser. 16 Q: All right. And it would have been 17 available had you asked for it? 18 A: Yeah, I think so, sure. 19 Q: All right. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: Now, in August you've got undercover 22 police officers in the Park -- 23 A: Right. 24 Q: -- correct? They're reporting to you 25 about what they're seeing in the Park?


1 A: No, I just told you that they're 2 reporting to Carson. He's -- he's -- taking that 3 information. 4 Q: In August. 5 A: Oh, August, sorry. Pardon me. In 6 August, yes. 7 Q: In August you're overseeing the 8 undercover operations in the Park, correct? 9 A: Right. 10 Q: They're reporting to you what's going 11 on? 12 A: Right. 13 Q: All right. At some point it sounds 14 like it changed from reporting directly to you to either 15 reporting to Bell or if Bell's doing it reporting 16 directly to Carson is that correct? 17 A: The undercover operator -- 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: -- officers in the Park? 20 Q: The -- the surveillance operations 21 I'll call them. 22 A: Okay. Well, those... 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 A: Do you want me to answer that? 2 Q: No. 3 A: Okay. 4 Q: The undercover operations in the Park 5 in August 1995 were reporting directly to you, right? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: At the start of this Project Maple, 8 September 4th, there was no longer undercover operations 9 in the Park -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- although there were a pair of 12 officers who walked the beach at one (1) point and a 13 cruiser parked on the beach at another point in time that 14 would report information back to Mr. -- Inspector Carson; 15 is that fair? 16 A: Sure. 17 Q: Okay. With respect to the 18 information coming back from Bell and Dyke who I 19 understand were the two (2) officers that walked the 20 beach -- 21 A: That's what I think, yeah. 22 Q: -- did that come back to you, or 23 directly to -- 24 A: I think it was Carson. 25 Q: All right. And were you part of --


1 A: And I was there. It appears from the 2 telephone conversation that I had with Robertson that I 3 was there, but I don't recall that. Today, I don't 4 recall that. 5 Q: Okay. But if it came back to 6 Inspector Carson, you have testified it's a small room, 7 you might have overheard it, if it occurred? 8 A: I think I did overhear it. 9 Q: Okay. 10 A: I must have overheard it. 11 Q: That particular one -- 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: -- you may have overheard it. 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: Okay. And they reported that there 16 wasn't much going on in the Park, it was fairly peaceful? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: Right. 19 A: I think they gave a number of people 20 that they saw in there. 21 Q: Right. 22 A: I thought. 23 Q: Around the washrooms and around the-- 24 A: Yeah, not very many -- 25 Q: -- fence line?


1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: Not much going on. 3 A: No. 4 Q: Okay. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: You'd agree that it would be an 9 important part of an operation such as this to have that 10 kind of intelligence information available to the OPP, 11 regarding what's going on in the Park? 12 A: Sure. 13 Q: All right. Was a decision made, or 14 was it considered to put undercover officers in the Park 15 at any point in time on September 5th or 6th? 16 A: No, not that I know of. 17 Q: All right. Are you aware of an 18 individual by the name of Jim Moses? 19 A: No. 20 Q: All right. He never reported to you 21 in -- 22 A: No. 23 Q: -- regards to anything that was 24 occurring in the Park? 25 A: No.


1 Q: All right. And you don't know the 2 name? You've -- 3 A: I don't know the name. 4 Q: -- never heard the name? 5 A: No. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: All right. Let me turn to the issue 10 of negotiations. 11 A: Okay. 12 Q: In your Project Maple, you have it in 13 front of you there, which Tab I forget. 14 A: I have it. 15 Q: 16. There's a Tab for negotiations. 16 A: Right. 17 Q: At that Tab -- oh, I understand you 18 don't have the -- 19 A: That's okay. Just go ahead, I'll 20 find it. I'm listening. 21 Q: The Tab is Negotiations, but the page 22 itself says "Response Plan" at the top of it. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 A: Got it. 2 Q: You see that? 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: It's got a number of names listed. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: You've just been provided with the 9 exhibit copy for the ease of referring to Tabs. The 10 Negotiations tab should be fairly clear, then. 11 At the top -- the top it says "Response 12 Plan". You'd agree with me that there's no directives 13 listed for what would be the content of any negotiations, 14 correct? 15 A: Right. 16 Q: All right. There's no directive as 17 to what's going to be discussed, how it's going to be 18 discussed, in terms of negotiations. 19 A: Right. 20 Q: All right. You've been quoted in the 21 press at the time as saying there weren't going to be any 22 negotiations, we're simply looking to discuss anything 23 with the people occupying the Park. 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: Is that accurate? You weren't


1 looking to negotiate -- 2 A: I'm -- 3 Q: -- anything -- 4 A: I don't know I -- if you say I said 5 that, I said that; that's fine. I mean, I don't recall 6 saying that. 7 Q: Well, you'd agree with me that you 8 weren't in a position to negotiate anything with respect 9 to the land claim? 10 A: Agreed. 11 Q: All right. The only thing you could 12 negotiate would be people leaving the Park? 13 A: Right. 14 Q: Right. And if they chose not to 15 leave the Park, there was nothing to negotiate, correct? 16 A: Yeah, I'd agree with you. 17 Q: Right. And it would have been 18 helpful, wouldn't you agree, to have a field telephone 19 available for people inside the Park to talk directly 20 with the negotiators? 21 A: I think we could have -- that's an 22 excellent -- there's all sorts of things we could have 23 done, I think -- 24 Q: Right. 25 A: -- in hindsight.


1 Q: Well, that was part of the 2 operational plan with regards to the Camp, wasn't it? 3 The use of a field telephone, to talk with 4 people occupying the Camp or the Base. 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: Do you recall that? 7 A: No, I don't. 8 Q: In your two (2) years of overseeing 9 the operational plan for the Base and the Camp did that 10 topic ever come up; using a field telephone? 11 A: I don't recall that because we'd go 12 to the Base and talk to the people. It was never really 13 -- I never con -- I never had a problem, that I recall, 14 contacting the people at the Base. 15 Q: All right. With regards to the Park, 16 then -- 17 A: Right. 18 Q: -- you had a problem contacting 19 people you considered to be in a leadership role, right? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: Did you ever consider using a field 22 telephone or the Park telephones for that purpose? 23 A: Sir, no -- 24 Q: Okay. 25 A: -- because we were trying to talk to


1 them. They -- it was quite clear they didn't want to 2 have anything to do with us, they didn't want to talk to 3 us. 4 Q: Will you agree with me that you 5 weren't negotiating anything with regards to the protest 6 that was occurring, you simply wanted them off the Park 7 land? 8 A: No. From a personal point of view I 9 would have liked to have been able to establish a 10 dialogue with them to see if we could come to some kind 11 of an understanding of where we were going to go from 12 there, because we had a problem. 13 Q: As to how they were going to leave 14 the Park lands. 15 A: Well my position was that it was the 16 Province of Ontario's property and that's what I would 17 have preferred, yeah. 18 Q: You had already -- 19 A: But we were -- 20 Q: -- taken a side in the dispute that 21 you perceived to be going on with regards to the Park 22 property, correct? 23 A: I'd taken a position, sure, yeah. 24 Q: Sure. 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: You had already agreed with MNR, 2 through your own research -- 3 A: Right. 4 Q: -- that these people were committing 5 a crime and trespassing in the Park. 6 A: Right. 7 Q: You knew what Colour of Right was. 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: You simply didn't think it applied in 10 this situation. 11 A: Agreed. 12 Q: You thought it applied with regards 13 to the Base. 14 A: Right. 15 Q: You didn't think it applied with 16 regards to the Park. 17 A: I agree with you. 18 Q: It turned out you were wrong, right? 19 A: Apparently so, yes. 20 Q: Right. And that's one of the risks 21 that's run when the OPP takes a side in the dispute 22 without the benefit of a court ruling by way of an 23 injunction, correct? 24 A: Well, no, sir, I disagree with you. 25 I mean I think you're making somewhat of a leap there.


1 The -- the fact is is my mindset was that there had been 2 a land claim review, or whatever you'd like to call it, 3 by MNR that Carson had caused to take place. 4 And I was content that the prop -- there 5 was no dispute with respect to the property. And we were 6 containing and negotiating in an attempt to get an 7 injunction. So that's exactly what we were doing. 8 I don't know so much that we were taking 9 sides as opposed to it was a complaint by a person who -- 10 they were the complainant, it appeared in -- as far as I 11 was concerned, they had a -- a lawful complaint based on 12 the information that I had. We weren't going to act 13 without an injunction. 14 Q: The military complained about people 15 occupying the Base -- 16 A: Right. 17 Q: -- and the OPP told them go get an 18 injunction. 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: Correct? 21 A: Right. 22 Q: MNR complained about people occupying 23 the Park. 24 A: Right. 25 Q: OPP told them go get an injunction.


1 A: Right. 2 Q: But at the same time, you, as 3 negotiator, are there trying to get them to leave the 4 Park. 5 A: I'm not a negotiator. I never said I 6 was a negotiator. My func -- 7 Q: You were there -- 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: -- to negotiate but you weren't the 10 negotiator, correct? 11 A: I was there to introduce -- every 12 time I went down there, sir, I went with a negotiator. 13 Brad Seltzer was a negotiator, Marg Eve was a negotiator. 14 Every time I went down there I went with one of them. 15 My function there was to try and make the 16 intro because I knew the people there. But we -- we 17 never got into a situation where we got into any kind of 18 a discussion with anybody because of their refusal to 19 talk to us. 20 Q: Right. And you went down there and 21 you had a firearm, correct? 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: And Marg Eve went down there and she 24 had her full uniform, correct? 25 A: Yeah. And so did Seltzer, yes.


1 Q: And so did Sergeant Seltzer. 2 A: Right. 3 Q: Did Marg Eve or Seltzer, whose rank I 4 don't know -- 5 A: Sergeant. 6 Q: -- Sergeant Seltzer, ever go without 7 you to try to talk to anybody? 8 A: No, not that I -- no, I would say no. 9 Q: Did they ever go out of uniform to 10 try to talk to anybody? 11 A: No. 12 Q: You were aware that comments had been 13 made that people on the Base, who were then in the Park, 14 didn't want OPP officers coming onto the Base or into the 15 Park with firearms; that was a concern for them. 16 A: Disagree. I was aware, back when the 17 takeover of the Base took place, that they didn't want us 18 to go in there with firearms. 19 And my recollection is Carson told them 20 that we were armed in the execution of our duty and that 21 we were going to come in, and we did go in. My 22 recollection is they did go in. 23 But in any event, we never got that far 24 with them down at the Park because they didn't talk to us 25 and we weren't going to go in the Park. We never went


1 beyond the fence line. 2 Q: Right. You wanted to talk with their 3 leaders, correct? 4 A: Anybody, yeah. 5 Q: Right. And you since learned, if you 6 didn't know then you know now, that concerns raised by 7 the occupiers was that you would target their leaders -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- if they identified them for you. 10 A: Right. I know that now. 11 Q: Right. 12 A: Right. 13 Q: That was a concern that they had. 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: That's a concern that could have been 16 addressed if you weren't part of the group that was going 17 down there, or you used the field telephone and they 18 didn't have to have a face-to-face conversation, correct? 19 A: Well, I don't know how it changes, 20 because I personally went down there. I mean, if any 21 police officer was going to go down there and talk to 22 them and they were going to identify -- if that was their 23 problem, I -- it wouldn't much matter if it was me or any 24 other officer, number 1. 25 Number 2, I see your point with respect to


1 the field telephone, if that was their concern and they 2 wanted to remain anonymous, that would have been a way to 3 have get over that hurdle. 4 So, yes, that would -- 5 Q: Right. 6 A: -- have been helpful. 7 Q: All right. I have bundled them, I'll 8 take them apart. The field telephone would have 9 addressed that concern -- 10 A: Yeah, I think -- 11 Q: -- directly? 12 A: -- so, yeah. Potentially, yeah. 13 Q: Right. Now, let's go to your 14 involvement. 15 A: Right. 16 Q: All right. You're down there -- 17 A: Right. 18 Q: -- and you have, in your back pocket 19 or back at the TOC, warrants for people's arrest, 20 correct? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: You have the opportunity that if 23 you're able to single out one of Roderick George, Stuart 24 George or David George, you've got warrants for their 25 arrest for their activities on September 4th, right?


1 A: I have -- there are warrants 2 outstanding, agreed. 3 Q: Right. You have the ability to 4 arrest them? 5 A: I have the option, yeah. 6 Q: Right. And that's an option you 7 would have pursued if you were given that opportunity, 8 correct? 9 A: At the fence line; is that what 10 you're suggesting? 11 You're tying the warrants to my attendance 12 at the fence line and if that's what you're trying -- 13 attempting to do, I would disagree with you. 14 If Roderick George or whomever had a 15 warrant for their arrest came up to the fence and talked 16 to me, assuming I knew who those individuals were when 17 they did come up and talk to me, then we would engage in 18 a conversation. 19 There was all sorts of criminal offences 20 going on on the other side of that fence that we didn't 21 do anything about; that wasn't our -- that wasn't why we 22 were down there. 23 I mean, frankly, there were people in 24 possession of mirrors that they had removed from -- after 25 breaking into the -- the store and were shining in our


1 eyes. I mean, if that -- that's possession of stolen 2 goods. 3 We didn't walk over the fence and go and 4 arrest those individuals; that's not why we were there. 5 So I take issue with that -- the nexus you make with the 6 warrants and my attendance down at the Park. 7 Q: Right. Well, you took the warrants a 8 step further, didn't you? You knew who Glenn George was? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: You knew that he was a leader; 11 you'd -- 12 A: I -- 13 Q: -- identified him as a leader, as of 14 August. 15 A: Right. 16 Q: Right? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: And that's who you were looking to 19 talk to? 20 A: Right, because I knew him. 21 Q: And in your back pocket, you also 22 looked to getting a warrant for Glenn George's arrest, 23 correct? 24 A: Yeah, sometime later on we want a 25 warrant -- I don't recall what that was for, though, but


1 fair enough, yeah. 2 Q: Right. Nothing to do with September 3 4th, 1995. 4 A: I don't know what it's for. 5 Q: Right. It would have been nice to 6 have a warrant for Glenn George's or for Glenn George if 7 he came out -- 8 A: Well when -- 9 Q: -- to negotiate. 10 A: No. You know, sir, I take issue with 11 that. That wasn't, you know, there wasn't anything 12 nefarious about trying to speak to Glenn George or 13 anybody else or warrants. 14 There -- you know, that's police work. If 15 he'd committed an offence and we knew it and we could 16 identify him, then it's my duty to get a warrant. I 17 mean, that's part of our job. But that's separate and 18 distinct from what I was doing down there. You know, you 19 have to take -- you have to multi-task and you deal with 20 the issue at hand. 21 I'm not going to concern myself with 22 mischief to the windshield of a cruiser and making an 23 arrest of an individual who has come to talk to us at the 24 gate; that's not what we were going to do. 25 Q: Right. It was important to have a


1 warrant for Glenn George -- 2 A: If he broke -- 3 Q: -- on September 5th, wasn't it? 4 A: Sir, if he broke the law, and I don't 5 recall what it is, but if he broke the law and there were 6 reasonable and probable grounds that he committed an 7 offence, then that's our job to have those warrants 8 issued. 9 I mean, that's part of policing. You 10 know, one goes hand in hand with the other. 11 Q: Right. I'm suggesting to you that 12 part of what you were doing at that fence line on 13 September 5th and September 6th, with these warrants in 14 hand, was looking for an opportunity to arrest one of 15 the -- 16 A: That's absurd. 17 Q: -- leaders. 18 A: Sir, they weren't in hand, number 1. 19 I mean, are you -- they weren't literally with me and 20 number 2, that's not what we were doing. I mean, I just 21 -- I don't know where you get that from, but absolutely 22 positively not. 23 Q: Right. And at the time, you were of 24 the mindset, and this comes from Vince George, a first 25 cousin to a number of these people that are occupying the


1 Park -- 2 A: Right. 3 A: Right. 4 Q: "It is time for an arrest. It would 5 show them it's a big plan happening; 6 may encourage them to talk. They may 7 talk if one (1) of them is arrested." 8 A: Yeah. When does that happen, sir? 9 September 4th. 10 Q: Do you remember that comment? 11 A: No, I don't but I've read it. 12 Q: All right. I'm suggesting to you 13 that that was your mindset when you were at that fence 14 line. 15 A: I disagree. I disagree. That 16 happened September 4th. You know let's take things in 17 the order that they're happening. 18 George -- Vince makes that call when he's 19 with Kobayashi on the night of September 4th when he goes 20 to the kiosk. Now you're talking about me attempting to 21 make contact with those people. I mean, frankly, look at 22 the -- look at the scribe notes about the great 23 discussion. We go into who would be the best person to 24 go down there to meet these people and there's Vince and 25 all sorts of other individuals.


1 I mean, clearly what we want to do is 2 establish contact and not make arrests. And -- and if 3 that were the case I suspect it would have been in the 4 minutes unless you're suggesting I had my own agenda 5 which is again -- I -- I don't know where -- where that 6 would come from. 7 Q: I didn't suggest that. 8 A: Well -- 9 Q: But did you have your own agenda? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Just one (1) second, Commissioner. 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: Just one (1) moment, Mr. 16 Commissioner. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 18 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: We have a couple of 19 papers. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: I'm just trying to 22 sort through a time. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 25 Q: If you could turn, Inspector Wright,


1 to Tab 18 of your book of documents. 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And at page 58. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: At the time 10:06, do you have that 9 in front of you? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And I see that that's carried on from 12 page 51 which indicates that it's the 6th of September, 13 '95 10:06 in the morning. Do you have that before you? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: At the bottom it says: 16 "Constable George feels it's time for 17 an arrest. Show them it's a big plan 18 happening. Show them that we have a 19 plan. It will give us a psychological 20 plan; it may encourage them to talk 21 because if one (1) of their people has 22 gotten arrested they may talk. 23 Sergeant Seltzer left for Kettle 24 Point." 25 A: Right.


1 Q: That's the same Sergeant Seltzer 2 who's supposed to be negotiating correct? 3 A: Right. Right. So I -- I stand 4 corrected it was 10:06 not September 4th that -- I 5 thought it was -- I thought Vince said that September 4th 6 when he went to the gate with Les but I stand corrected. 7 He said it 10:06 -- 8 Q: Right. 9 A: -- September 5th. 10 Q: You're wrong. 11 A: I'm -- 12 Q: It happened September the 6th. 13 A: Right. 14 Q: In the middle of these efforts to get 15 someone to come out -- 16 A: Right. 17 Q: -- and negotiate with you? 18 A: Agreed. 19 Q: And I'm suggesting that part of what 20 you were trying to do was to get one (1) of the leaders 21 to come out on the premise that you're going to negotiate 22 with them and you are going to arrest them? 23 A: I certainly see where you are coming 24 from, sir, but that's not -- was not my intention in any 25 way shape or form.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Just for the purposes 2 of the record the -- there is a discussion at Exhibit P- 3 426, Tab 18 on the evening of -- at page 52238 and 4 following, with respect to making arrests, and I believe 5 there's a reference to Vince George among that discussion 6 that the Witness may have been referring to on the 7 evening of September 4th. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 10 Q: It may be one of these situations 11 that cuts both ways. I think that you may have been 12 correct from what we hear that that issue came up on 13 September 4th. It also obviously came up again on 14 September 6th? 15 A: Agreed. 16 Q: So, again, I suggest to you that one 17 of the underlying themes to this effort to get one of the 18 leaders to come forward was that if you could make an 19 arrest it sure would have helped the situation -- 20 A: No. 21 Q: -- from the OPP point of view? 22 A: No. No. 23 Q: All right. We've heard from some of 24 the occupiers that they did come forward but not to 25 negotiate but simply to talk with you and Marg Eve?


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: All right. We've heard from Gina 3 George that at one point she told you, why don't you 4 speak with my kids, they're the future leaders? 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: Do you recall that occurring? 7 A: No. I remember talking to a young 8 lad there though. 9 Q: All right. 10 A: And I remember talking to a number of 11 people, but frankly, sir, after all this time I -- I 12 don't take issue that we had that conversation. If she 13 said we did I'm sure that we did. I just -- I don't 14 recall. 15 Q: Right. I'm just noting that people 16 did talk to you. They simply didn't produce somebody who 17 in your assessment -- 18 A: Right. 19 Q: -- would have been important for this 20 purpose? 21 A: Agreed. 22 Q: All right. 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: Did you, in the course of these 25 discussions that you had with people at the gate,


1 including Bert Manning -- 2 A: Mr. Manning, yeah. 3 Q: -- up at the gate -- 4 A: Hmm hmm. 5 Q: -- others down at the park, did you 6 ever tell them that we have a concern about that parking 7 lot. It's very important for us and if you just stay in 8 the park everything will be okay? 9 A: No. 10 Q: All right. Certainly there was an 11 opportunity to tell them that, right? 12 A: I would say so. Sure. 13 Q: Yeah. And a missed opportunity 14 unfortunately? 15 A: Agreed. 16 Q: All right. A different topic, I 17 understand, and I'm just looking for your input on this, 18 it's going to be something that comes up with Sergeant 19 Korosec, but the night of September 5th we're going to 20 hear a tape, I understand played during Mr. Korosec's -- 21 again, his position I don't know at this point in time, 22 but there's going to be a tape played that he will say 23 that he had a discussion with you the night of September 24 5th, 1995, a copy of which we've provided to you by way 25 of notice --


1 A: Hmm hmm. 2 Q: -- that seems to indicate comments 3 from you to the effect that you're looking to put 4 together an army -- 5 A: Right. 6 Q: -- an army to move on the occupiers? 7 A: Right. I've -- I've read that. 8 Q: Do you recall, A), having a 9 discussion with Sergeant Korosec at the time on September 10 5th -- the night of September 5th, 1995? 11 A: No. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: And I'll go farther than that. My 14 recollection is I never had a discussion with him in -- 15 I've heard that tape and read the document -- the 16 transcription and my recollection is I never had a 17 conversation with him in regards to that at all. 18 So I, frankly, I'm at a loss where that 19 comes from. 20 Q: Best we could do in identifying a 21 discussion with Sergeant Korosec was from your Tab 18, P- 22 426, page 41. There's an entry that had since been 23 corrected by Commission Counsel for 18:07. 24 A: Right. 25 Q: It may be 16:07 still on your page,


1 but it should be 18:07. That appears to be a 2 conversation in which you're present and Sergeant Korosec 3 is present. He's referred to on the next page. 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: That's the best we could do in terms 6 of putting the two (2) of you together in any kind of 7 minutes or documentation, and that would be 6:07 at night 8 on September the 5th. 9 A: Okay. 10 Q: Did you have any discussion, after 11 this discussion that's referenced in this note, with 12 Sergeant Korosec the night of September 5th -- 13 A: Not that I recall. 14 Q: All right. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Okay, you can put that book to the 19 side. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: Now, I'd like to turn to September 24 the 6th. And I appreciate that this has been mined 25 extensively but there's a couple of questions I still


1 have for you, on September the 6th. 2 When you went to the curve in the road -- 3 Q: Hmm hmm. 4 A: -- and you had a discussion with the 5 individual who came out to talk to you, did you tell him, 6 at that point in time, we want you in that Park, being in 7 the parking lot causes us concerns? 8 A: No. He had no idea I was -- I was a 9 police officer. 10 Q: Right. Why didn't you tell him you 11 were a police officer and that that was a concern that 12 you had? 13 A: Well, I think I've made that clear. 14 I was there by myself and I was -- a number of them were 15 armed and I felt that if I identified myself as a police 16 officer there would be a confrontation. 17 Q: One (1) of them came out to talk to 18 you. 19 A: One (1) of them came out to talk to 20 me, yeah. 21 Q: The rest were back -- 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: -- in the parking lot. 24 A: Right. 25 Q: How far away were they?


1 A: I couldn't say. 2 Q: Fifty (50) feet, a hundred (100) 3 feet? 4 A: I couldn't say, sir. I guess we 5 could go out there and measure the middle of the lane and 6 go to the fence and they were strung along there, 7 whatever -- 8 Q: Sure. 9 A: -- that may be. 10 Q: That would give a perfect 11 measurement. 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: Let's go approximate. Thirty (30) 14 feet? 15 A: Sure. 16 Q: It's your evidence. Is it thirty 17 (30) feet? 18 A: Well, that's -- sure, I -- I don't 19 take issue -- 20 Q: All right. That's approximate -- 21 A: -- with that, sure. 22 Q: All right. They're thirty (30) feet 23 away, you said they're armed but in your evidence in- 24 chief they're armed with bats. 25 A: Yeah, axe handles, something --


1 Q: Or sticks, right -- 2 A: Something like that. 3 Q: Okay. So one (1) comes out to talk 4 to you. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: You're in your car. 7 A: Right. 8 Q: It's pointed down the road. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: And you still felt that you were in 11 danger from the group that's thirty (30) feet back, if 12 you told them you were a police officer? 13 A: Well, that -- potentially I would 14 become involved in a confrontation with the individual 15 that was right near my car. 16 I mean, you -- I chose not to do that, 17 sir, for personal safety reasons. And why would I get 18 involved in a confrontation at that particular moment? 19 It would be just -- I just -- it wouldn't 20 be a reasonable or a very smart thing to do. Why would I 21 -- I mean, in my opinion, you wouldn't do that, you 22 wouldn't -- you wouldn't take that sort of a risk when 23 you're on your own when there are -- when there's no need 24 to. 25 Q: The reasonable approach that you took


1 was to mobilize an ERT force to deal with this -- 2 A: No -- 3 Q: -- crew -- 4 A: -- disagree. 5 Q: Right. 6 A: Disagree. 7 Q: You could have said to this one 8 individual -- 9 A: Right. 10 Q: -- I'm a police officer -- 11 A: Right. 12 Q: -- we have concerns about your being 13 in that parking lot, can you go back in the Park, we 14 won't care. 15 A: Sir, look, you know, we're -- I'm 16 there, there's an individual armed, there's a number of 17 them armed. I ask them -- I have a discussion with them. 18 They tell me to leave, they're tapping 19 their bats in their hands and I ask them if I can go to 20 the parking lot and they say no. 21 Well, they're committing a number of 22 criminal offences, it's a very provocative thing that 23 they're doing. And they're certainly alive to the fact 24 that there are a number of OPP officers at checkpoints on 25 that road, yet they have come out onto the -- they have


1 come out onto the road. 2 My mindset there was that, you know, that 3 would do me no good to say that to them, other than to 4 become engaged in a physical confrontation with them, so 5 I chose not to. 6 And then to make the leap that as a result 7 of that we moved a large number of ERT people down there 8 is incorrect, based on my evidence that I've given in 9 evidence in-chief. 10 Q: You're in a car. 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: You're not going to be in a physical 13 confrontation with -- 14 A: Well, with respect -- 15 Q: -- this individual. 16 A: -- sir, you weren't there, and I was. 17 Q: Right. 18 A: And that's the call I made. 19 Q: Right. You've got two (2) officers 20 on the beach in a marked car -- 21 A: I didn't know that. 22 Q: You had no idea? 23 A: I had no idea they were there. 24 Q: Did you have any idea, the night of 25 September 6th, that you had two (2) officers in a marked


1 vehicle that drove from the beach, through the parking 2 lot, and reported back? 3 A: No. 4 Q: Right. We have statements from 5 Officer Spencer. 6 A: Right. 7 Q: And I'll read it to you, and tell me 8 if you knew any of this that night. 9 "On the 6th of September '95 --" 10 And I'm referring to Inquiry Document 11 1002186. 12 "On the 6th of September 1995 I'm on 13 duty working the day shift, acting in 14 the capacity as an ERT member. I was 15 accompanied by Senior Constable 16 Weverink. We're first assigned to a 17 checkpoint, later assigned to do beach 18 patrol. 19 For most of the day we positioned our 20 cruiser at the north end of the public 21 beach near the perimeter of the 22 Ipperwash Provincial Park. 23 During the day I observed several 24 gatherings of Native males near the 25 beach near the Provincial Park [or in


1 the Provincial Park]. 2 A couple of them were observed carrying 3 wooden bats. On one occasion I 4 observed a car being driven by a Native 5 male in the Provincial Park beach in an 6 erratic manner, doing doughnuts and 7 spin outs. The car stopped facing our 8 cruiser at which time the occupants sat 9 staring at police for several minutes. 10 On one occasion a Native male came down 11 to the beach with a large mirror and 12 reflected sunlight at our cruiser. 13 At approximately 7:30 p.m. several 14 Natives came down to the beach area and 15 spread out, standing along the 16 perimeter of the Provincial Park. They 17 stood staring at our cruiser and I 18 observed a couple of them carrying 19 wooden bats. 20 We then drove the cruiser up from the 21 beach along the perimeter of the 22 Provincial Park. As we got up to the 23 parking lot, Army Camp Road area, I 24 observed four (4) Native males standing 25 on the parking lot area outside the


1 Provincial Park. Two (2) of these 2 Natives were carrying wooden bats. As 3 we drove past them, they glared at 4 police and slowly walked back to the 5 Provincial Park. 6 I immediately notified the Sergeant at 7 the Tactical Operation Centre of what 8 had just occurred." 9 A: Right. 10 Q: Were you aware of that -- 11 A: No. 12 Q: -- at the time? 13 A: No. 14 Q: When they report back to the Sergeant 15 at the Tactical Operation Centre, is that not where you 16 were? 17 A: No. 18 Q: You didn't go to the Tactical 19 Operation Centre? 20 A: Well, it's some time after 7:30, I 21 take from that statement, so by that time, you know, I'm 22 not sure -- I don't think that officer in his statement - 23 - I was either completing that talk with those people or 24 had left the -- the curve of the road and gone up to the 25 checkpoint.


1 I don't know exactly where I was there but 2 I think by 7:30 I'm -- I'm done that meeting. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: Sorry, Commission counsel just 7 pointed that that telephone call that I referred to at 8 the -- 9 A: That telephone call? 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Radio transmission. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. KEVIN SCULLION: 13 Q: -- end of -- the radio transmission, 14 at the end of the statement, occurred at 7:39 that night. 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Just to give you context -- 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: -- as to the timing. 19 A: Right. So I think I'm done with the 20 -- the TOC. I don't think -- I don't recall ever seeing 21 those two (2) officers, sir. 22 Q: Right. You never heard any of that 23 information, correct? 24 A: No, I don't recall that, no. 25 Q: All right. Because it seems that


1 from when you drove by, whatever time that specifically 2 was, to when they were there, we're down to four (4) -- 3 A: That's right. 4 Q: -- people in the parking lot. 5 A: Right. Well that can change, sure. 6 Q: Right. But that was obviously a 7 possibility that the people in the parking lot are going 8 to go back into the Park. 9 A: Absolutely. 10 Q: Right? That's one of the things 11 that could have happened, following your drive by that 12 area? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Right? 15 A: Agreed. The -- the only thing I 16 wanted to do, sir, as a result of that, was move 17 additional people down to the checkpoints. 18 Q: That's all you wanted to do? 19 A: Initially, yeah, as a result of those 20 people being there, move -- move them down immediately 21 and then my position with Linton was, let's get them to 22 go back into the Park. 23 Q: Right. But as part of this 24 discussion with Linton that took place -- 25 A: Right.


1 Q: -- the mobilization of a significant 2 number of people occurred. 3 A: No. No, there was no mobilization, 4 they just weren't -- they weren't allowed to go home, the 5 night shift was -- was kept. 6 Q: You held over two (2) ERT teams -- 7 A: Right. 8 Q: -- two (2) new ones were starting, 9 all of which were grouped together for the purpose of 10 addressing this problem -- 11 A: No. 12 Q: -- in the parking lot. 13 A: Well, no. The -- the day shift was 14 held over and the night shift went and -- went to their 15 spots that I -- that I recall. And the holding of the 16 shift was -- was -- I did that based on what happened 17 earlier in the morning. 18 As I've said, there were a number of 19 picnic tables and two (2) individuals were there, and it 20 was at shift change so we kept all those officers there. 21 So, you know, we had just had that sort of 22 a problem earlier in the morning and Carson had dealt 23 with it by keeping the shifts there, sending a large 24 number of individuals down there and dealing with it. 25 So I thought, well, then, you know, here


1 we have a similar problem in the parking lot again. 2 However, it's a little different because some of them are 3 armed as opposed to sitting on picnic tables. 4 The shifts are changing, it's very 5 reasonable and practical, I fell back to what Carson had 6 done, let's hold the shift in case we need them. Whether 7 or not they used them or not was, you know, up to them. 8 Q: Right. Again, I come back to Mr. 9 Rosenthal's point here earlier is, it's important to be 10 accurate in your evidence, right? 11 A: Sure. 12 Q: You keep referring to the concept of 13 being "armed." 14 A: Right. 15 Q: Right. Armed with sticks. Armed 16 with bats? 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: Right? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: That's accurate. It's not simply 21 "armed." 22 A: Sure. 23 Q: Right. You appreciate how a 24 misunderstanding can occur when you're loose with 25 terminology like that?


1 A: Well, sir, I don't -- I mean, you and 2 I are talking, we're in the Inquiry, I -- I -- I assume 3 that everybody here listening appreciates I meant armed 4 with bats. I certainly didn't mean they were armed with 5 anything else but that. But -- 6 Q: Right. 7 A: -- point taken and I will be 8 especially diligent when talking about that from now on 9 here, it that fair enough. I thought that was -- it goes 10 without saying that's what they were armed with. 11 Q: Right. Other options would have been 12 to see if the people just go back into the park, right? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Other options would be to tell them 15 you want them to go back -- 16 A: That was -- 17 Q: -- into the park? 18 A: -- my first -- exactly. 19 Q: Pretty good idea, right? 20 A: You know, sir, if they hadn't gone 21 back in the park we wouldn't have had a problem. And, 22 you know, CMU didn't move down the road because there 23 were four (4) guys with bats at seven o'clock at night in 24 the sandy parking lot, as far as I'm concerned. And I've 25 given that evidence with respect to all the information


1 that was coming in. 2 I mean, you know, there's a lot of things 3 that happened between 7:30 at night and eleven o'clock 4 that evening when CMU moves down the road, or whenever it 5 is they move down the road. 6 Q: Right. Well you've heard the 7 evidence of the occupiers to the extent that they saw a 8 mobilization of forces, they heard people talking over 9 the police scanners and thought that the police were 10 mobilizing against them. 11 You've heard that evidence, right? 12 A: I'm aware of that, yeah. 13 Q: You're aware of that view on the 14 other side of the fence, so to speak? 15 A: Right. Sure. 16 Q: Right? 17 A: Yes, that's fair. 18 Q: And on the OPP's side they see this 19 activity and say, We've got more trouble brewing, we 20 really have to get more people to go forward and march on 21 this parking lot, right? 22 A: Okay. Sure. 23 Q: That's what you're telling -- 24 A: Sure. 25 Q: -- me. There's so much going on that


1 that's a factor in why we're getting all these people 2 together to go down there? 3 A: Well it's a threat to public order, 4 yeah. 5 Q: Right. 6 A: So we have to deal with that. 7 Q: Right. 8 A: Right. 9 Q: And missing from this whole equation 10 is the concept that this parking lot is so important that 11 if the occupiers just go back in the park, the 12 mobilization of forces will come to an end, and nothing's 13 going to come of it. You'd agree with me -- 14 A: That's not -- 15 Q: -- a piece of information is missing 16 in this -- 17 A: It's -- 18 Q: -- whole equation? 19 A: It's not the parking lot, sir. I 20 mean, it's not -- it's not about a parking lot. It's not 21 about a piece of property down there. It's about a 22 breach of the peace and a threat to public safety down 23 there. And there are private individuals down there. 24 There's private homes down there. 25 They have -- everybody has a right to


1 being policed and -- well, like I say, the public safety 2 issue. It's not about a piece -- a parking lot that C -- 3 in my view. CMU didn't march down there because there 4 was a parking lot at issue there; that's not what that 5 was about. 6 So I take issue with that. 7 Q: There's nobody in the cottage beside 8 the parking lot, correct? 9 A: Well, sir, I don't -- we don't know 10 that at the time. I mean if we're talking -- 11 Q: You checked that? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: You confirmed it? 14 A: Yes. But -- 15 Q: There's nobody in the cottage? 16 A: -- sir, you know, it's not just that. 17 It's not that house. If not that house, it's the next 18 house. If not that house, the house after. You know, 19 it's not -- where does one draw the line, in my view, as 20 a police officer with respect to public safety. 21 The fact of the matter that Mr. and Mrs. 22 Smith, or whomever they were, happened to be out of their 23 house that night, doesn't take away that, you know, 24 that's their property and we have an obligation, and 25 beyond them, their neighbours and their neighbours and


1 their neighbours down that road. 2 I mean one, I don't think, should expect 3 to have to live on a roadway where there's a threat to 4 their safety in that public area. And clearly by the 5 comms. from the ERT officers there, that the officers 6 themselves felt threatened. And they were armed with 7 firearms, to be clear, and they felt threatened. 8 So, I mean, I think it goes without saying 9 that if the officers -- and the officers are considered 10 to be part of the public, if they're concerned about 11 safety then I think it goes to the point that we have an 12 obligation to protect everybody down there and there is 13 an incident that needs to be dealt with. 14 Q: Right. All issues raised by the 15 cottagers in your impromptu meeting with them on the 16 roadway that evening. 17 A: In the TOC. They were concerned, 18 sure, about their property, absolutely. 19 Q: Right. Across the road from the 20 parking lot is a farmer's field, right? 21 A: Pardon me? 22 Q: Across the road from the parking lot, 23 on the southwest -- 24 A: Right, yeah, yeah. 25 Q: -- corner, is a farmer's field


1 A: Yeah, it's some -- yeah. 2 Q: You have officers in that field, 3 right, watching what's going on? 4 A: Right. 5 Q: And we have a parking lot. 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: Right? You're drawing the line 8 somewhere. 9 A: We're drawing the line at the fence 10 line, sir. 11 Q: I see that. 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: It would have been important to tell 14 them that that's where the line's being drawn, to know if 15 you've got a concern for public safety, because they 16 disregard the line you're drawing. 17 A: You know, I don't take issue with -- 18 it's unfortunate we didn't make that -- it's unfortunate 19 -- I didn't make that position clear when I spoke to Mr. 20 Manning on September 5th, whatever it was. 21 But by the time of September 6th -- and 22 again, and I've made this point numerable times, it's not 23 my call, it was Carson's call, it wasn't mine, but, 24 nevertheless, there comes a point that the public safety 25 was at stake and he moved CMU down there.


1 And once they moved into the Park, CMU 2 started to retreat. So I mean, as I said at the 3 injunction that I thought the inference was there, but I 4 certainly take your point that it would have been helpful 5 had we made that leap and told them. I mean, who knows 6 what would have happened. 7 Q: Not much of a leap, is it, to tell 8 them where the line's being drawn? 9 A: Well, again, sir, it was a very 10 difficult -- you know you had to be there to be quite 11 frank with you. It was a very difficult situation and 12 Inspector Carson made the call that that was the 13 reasonable thing to do, considering what was going on; 14 trunks were being opened, people coming -- people were -- 15 officers were saying they were seeing baseball bats or 16 clubs or something coming out of their cars. 17 At one time one of the officers says that 18 he thinks there's up to twelve (12) of them out on the -- 19 out onto the roadway, Parkway, I mean. 20 You have a serious threat to public safety 21 there and at that point Carson and I -- I get somewhat 22 academic because it's his call again, but he decides that 23 he's going to move CMU down there because of the threat 24 to public safety. Well, you know, that's part of our job 25 too.


1 Q: At what point in time did you draw 2 the line along the fence? 3 A: September 4th. We never went into 4 the Park. 5 Q: So in all the discussions between 6 September 4th and when this occurred, 11:00 p.m. 7 September the 6th, all the interactions between the 8 police and the public and media, the occupiers and those 9 on the Base, it was never mentioned that that's where the 10 line was being drawn? 11 A: Agreed. 12 Q: All right. 13 A: My -- I'm making the point that the 14 inference was there but I certainly appreciate that it 15 was never specifically communicated to them. 16 Q: All right. 17 A: We agree. 18 Q: I suggest to you that the march down 19 the road was a show of force to appease the public that 20 wanted to see something happening with regards to this 21 issue, and it got out of hand. 22 A: Well again, that's ridiculous. 23 Q: Those are all my questions, Mr. 24 Commissioner. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you


1 very much. 2 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm just wondering, 3 before we break, My Friend made reference to the -- the 4 statement of Constable Weverink, I had actually given 5 notice of that statement and was going to introduce it. 6 So I wonder if that could be marked as an exhibit please. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm sorry, Spencer. 9 Sorry. Weverink is his partner. 10 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Yes, it was Officer 11 John Spencer that I read from. I read his full statement 12 but we should put it in. It's Inquiry Document 1002186. 13 THE REGISTRAR: P-1152, Your Honour. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1152? 15 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: Yes, do you want me 16 to mark it? 17 18 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1152: Document Number 1002186. 19 Statement of OPP Constable 20 John K. S. Spencer, September 21 07, 1995. 22 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, it might be 24 helpful not to mark it but just to alert everyone that 25 the conversation that My Friend referred to be -- with


1 respect to Sergeant Korosec was a conversation between 2 Sergeant Korosec and Constable Jacklin September 5 at 3 23:32 hours. 4 And we have -- the transcript is available 5 but we haven't played it. It will be played when 6 Sergeant Korosec is here. But I just simply wanted to -- 7 for the record to make it clear what it was. 8 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: And that was my 9 understanding that's why I didn't play it -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 MR. KEVIN SCULLION: -- at this point. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's now 13 12:05. Mr. Henderson, you're next. How long do you 14 think you might be? We'll take a break now but how long 15 do you think you might be? 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: I might give a 20 better estimate on a full stomach, Commissioner. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you want 22 to wait until after lunch to make your estimate? 23 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Sure. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It would be 25 a better estimate --


1 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: It would be a 2 better -- Mr. Scullion has used some of my time wisely 3 and I won't try to recapture it. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So you won't 5 be as long as your original estimate was at -- 6 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: No. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 8 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Nowhere close. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: I would think 11 more on the order of thirty (30) minutes. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 13 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: If that. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's good 15 enough. Then we're still hopeful that we can complete 16 with Inspector Wright by the end of the day, so thank you 17 very much. 18 Is that still a possibility, Mr. Falconer? 19 Your estimate was two (2) to three (3) hours, and I 20 assume it -- 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Two (2) hours, 22 actually. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Pardon me? 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I thought it was two


1 (2) hours. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Millar's 3 mistaken. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What was 5 your estimate? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: My estimate was two 7 (2) to three (3) hours and I expect to be three (3) 8 hours. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, that's 10 fine. We should be able to finish today. Thank you very 11 much. 12 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 13 adjourned until 1:15. 14 15 --- Upon recessing at 12:07 p.m. 16 --- Upon resuming at 1:16 p.m. 17 18 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 19 resumed. Please be seated. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 25 afternoon, Mr. Henderson.


1 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Good afternoon, 2 Commissioner. 3 4 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: 5 Q: Good afternoon, Inspector Wright. 6 A: Good afternoon. 7 Q: My name is Bill Henderson. Mr. John 8 George and I represent the Chippewas of Kettle and Stony 9 Point First Nation and we are occasionally, as today, 10 agents for the Chiefs of Ontario office as well. 11 I'm going to take you first to September 12 the 6th where you have spent much time over the past few 13 days, and particularly to the fact the Inquiry has heard 14 that Chief Bressette, and you know who Chief Bressette -- 15 A: Chief Bressette? 16 Q: Chief Bressette, Chief Tom Bressette, 17 you know who that is? 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: Chief Tom Bressette received 20 information that the then-Premier of the Province had 21 directed that the Indians be removed from the Park. 22 A: He had received that info -- 23 Q: I'm not quoting directly, 24 Commissioner. I think you've heard it often enough. I 25 take it you were not aware of that at the time or --


1 A: No. 2 Q: -- were you? As a result of 3 receiving that information on September the 6th, he 4 caused a -- a broadcast to be made on a radio station 5 from Sarnia, warning the people in the Park that OPP 6 action was imminent. 7 Were you aware of that broadcast? 8 A: No, no. 9 Q: You did refer earlier to a group 10 within the OPP that monitors the media? 11 A: Right, yeah. 12 Q: And you would have -- 13 A: Media relations. 14 Q: And you would expect them to advise 15 you of anything relevant to your ongoing actions? 16 A: No. What they would -- funny enough, 17 no, that's not how it would work. They -- they were 18 just the gatherer of that information and then you would, 19 if you wanted it, you'd request it. 20 So they -- they would just gather all news 21 items relative to your incident and then they would be 22 the repository and if you wanted it, you'd have to go ask 23 for it. 24 But it's not that they would volunteer 25 that back to you.


1 Q: I see. So that there is no one else 2 to your knowledge in the OPP that would monitor local 3 broadcasts to see what kinds of messages were being 4 issued to the public? 5 A: Oh, sure. I think probably my best 6 guess would be Sergeant Babbitt would -- I suspect would 7 have been alive to what was going on in the broadcasts. 8 He was our media relations officer there. 9 Q: And was he on the scene on September 10 the 6th? 11 A: I thought he was. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: There -- there would have been a 14 media officer there, like, at all times, as I recall; 15 that was part of the plan. 16 Q: Okay. But to the best of your 17 knowledge and recollection, you received no information 18 from Sergeant Babbitt about such a broadcast? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: Did you receive any other information 21 from Sergeant -- 22 A: Not -- 23 Q: -- Babbitt about broadcasts or media 24 reports? 25 A: Sir, he may have. I just -- I don't


1 recall. 2 Q: Okay. Now, later in the evening, 3 you've already explained that you made arrangements for, 4 I believe, it was Constable Dew to deliver the -- the 5 Gerald George incident report? 6 A: Dew, Constable Dew. 7 Q: I believe I said Dew, didn't I? 8 A: Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't hear you -- 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: -- correctly. My mistake. 11 Q: Yes, Constable Dew. 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: To deliver it? 14 A: That's my recollection, yes. 15 Q: And we have, I believe, in the scribe 16 notes, like My Colleagues, of course, Commissioner, I'm 17 indebted to Commission Counsel for his assistance. 18 In the scribe notes, I don't think you 19 need to turn to them, but at 22:44 there's this entry: 20 "Mark Dew discussed the mischief 21 incident with Dale Linton to give 22 information to Superintendent. Suspect 23 Stewart Bradley (phonetic) George hit 24 car with rock." 25 You've see that --


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: -- that entry. 3 A: I've seen that, yeah. 4 Q: Were you present when this -- that 5 discussion took place between -- 6 A: I -- I don't recall, sir, I was in 7 the Command Post in and around that time. 8 Q: Okay. And you've subsequently become 9 aware -- perhaps I should ask you were -- were you 10 present and did you overhear the subsequent conversation 11 that Inspector Linton had with Superintendent Parkin? 12 A: I don't recall if I did or not, sir. 13 Q: Yeah. You -- you have, I believe, 14 subsequently become aware that the content of that 15 conversation in relation to that particular incident was 16 substantially wrong? 17 A: Right, with respect to the 18 information that Linton was giving to Parkin? 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: And you're not aware of any reason 22 for that or any other source that may have contributed to 23 that error? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Thank you. And you were -- you were


1 also present at the incident, I believe Mr. Scullion 2 described it as six (6) months earlier where Darryl 3 George (phonetic) was I suppose holed up in a house at -- 4 on the Kettle Point Reserve? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: And Inspector Linton was the Incident 7 Commander and you were his 2IC on that occasion? 8 A: No, I would be -- I was the -- I 9 can't remember if I was the Detective -- acting Detective 10 Staff Sergeant or Detective Sergeant but I would have 11 been there as part of the crime package for that major 12 incident. I think I was the acting Staff Sergeant then, 13 sir. 14 Q: Okay. And you've already told the -- 15 the Commissioner that there was a perimeter set up; there 16 was an individual within the house and the effort was 17 basically to get the individual out of the house and I 18 believe pla -- place him under arrest. 19 Was that -- was that substantially 20 correct? 21 A: Right, yeah. 22 Q: Now, in a situation like that and the 23 perimeter was established by TRU teams? 24 A: Right. There was -- my recollection 25 was there was an inner perimeter by TRU and an outer


1 perimeter by ERT. 2 Q: In an incident like that do you 3 recall if anyone had a Loud Hailer president -- present 4 to communicate with -- 5 A: Don't -- 6 Q: -- Mr. George? 7 A: Don't recall, sir. 8 Q: All right. Do you recall the role 9 played by Bernard George, one of the Band Councillors 10 who... 11 A: No. 12 Q: The Commission has heard evidence 13 that Mr. Bernard George came into the perimeter. He was 14 a cousin I believe of Mr. Daryl George and that he 15 intervened and arranged his surrender to the Anishinabek 16 police. 17 A: Okay. 18 Q: Is -- is your recollection different 19 or -- 20 A: I don't -- I'm not taking issue with 21 that. 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: I just don't recall that. I thought 24 it was Miles who negotiated his surrender, frankly. 25 Q: Okay. On the -- the morning of, I


1 believe, it's September 6th you were on duty and 2 arrangements were made for a group to go in and remove 3 the picnic tables -- 4 A: Right. 5 Q: -- from the so-called sandy parking 6 lot? 7 A: Right. 8 Q: On that occasion there was two (2) -- 9 there were two (2) individuals on the scene from the 10 First Nation who left in the face of the incoming police 11 contingent? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And we've been told that warrants 14 were issued for their arrest? 15 A: I just recall -- I'm not taking issue 16 with that I just -- I only recall that -- that Mr. 17 Anthony George, I don't remember the other -- 18 Q: Yes? 19 A: -- other person being identified and 20 warrants being issued but if that's so that's -- I don't 21 take any issue with that. 22 Q: Well, that's fine. I'm -- I'm 23 particularly interested in -- in Mr. Anthony George. 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: And were you the person directed to


1 arrange for those warrants to be issued? 2 A: No, I think Trevor Richardson was 3 looking after that. 4 Q: Do you have any further information 5 about those warrants when they were issued or -- 6 A: No, there's -- 7 Q: -- obviously not much action was 8 possible shortly after the fact. 9 A: Right. I -- I recall there's -- 10 there's something in the notes about somebody going to go 11 get the warrants -- warrant for arrest; warrant, 12 singular. 13 Q: Thank you. On September 5th and 6th 14 there were -- you made at least two (2) trips to the 15 sandy parking lot, to the Park? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And on one (1) or both of those 18 occasions you were accompanied by Sergeant Eve? 19 A: I was accompanied by Sergeant Eve on 20 one (1) of the occasions. 21 Q: And Constable Seltzer on the other? 22 A: Sergeant Seltzer, yes. 23 Q: Sergeant Seltzer. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Thank you. And were you in uniform


1 on those occasions? 2 A: No. 3 Q: And also, I believe, on September the 4 5th, you went to the camp gate and that's where you spoke 5 to Mr. Bert Manning? 6 A: Correct. 7 Q: All right. Now, were you in uniform 8 on that occasion? 9 A: No. 10 Q: All right. Now, you spoke this 11 morning about there being a large difference between 12 visiting the one place as distinct from the other, and 13 illustrated that by the fact that you wore a vest down at 14 the Park and not at the Camp. 15 So, really, was it your perception that 16 there was some difference in the situation? 17 A: Yeah, sure, that's my perception, 18 yeah. Fair. 19 Q: Okay. But you were dealing, 20 effectively, with the same people? 21 A: Well, some of the same people, yes. 22 Q: Okay. And you also indicated that on 23 at least one of the occasions when you went to the Park, 24 you thought Officer Evans was behind you, taking video? 25 A: yeah, I thought so.


1 Q: And that turned out not to be the 2 case? 3 A: Apparently so because I've never seen 4 any of it, so. 5 Q: Okay. Now, was Sergeant Eve in 6 uniform on -- 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: Sergeant Seltzer? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: And Officer Evans? I don't know his 11 rank. 12 A: Yeah, he'd be in uniform. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: He'd be a constable at the time. 15 Q: Would they in the normal course have 16 been wearing vests on an occasion like that? 17 A: Yeah, as part of their working 18 uniform. 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: Now, later on, on September the 6th, 22 you drove down alone in an unmarked car? 23 A: Right. 24 Q: And you were not in uniform on that 25 occasion?


1 A: Correct. 2 Q: You've talked several times about the 3 degree to which the people in the parking lot were armed. 4 Were you armed on that occasion? 5 A: I think I was. 6 Q: And you were, I think, it'd be fair 7 to state, more heavily armed than they were. 8 A: I would have had a firearm. 9 Q: Yes. 10 A: So, yes. 11 Q: Okay. You also indicated that you do 12 not believe that they recognized you? 13 A: I didn't think they did, no. 14 Q: Notwithstanding the fact that you'd 15 been on the scene several times out of uniform -- 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: -- over the course of the previous 18 two (2) days. 19 A: The -- my evidence was that the 20 individual I was speaking to, I was pretty content he 21 didn't recognize me, but the one who was coming up behind 22 him towards my car, I thought recognized me. 23 Q: Okay. You weren't surprised, of 24 course, to be recognized? 25 A: No, I wasn't surprised, no.


1 Q: Okay. Now, as a result of that 2 exchange, or the exchange you had with the one (1) 3 individual -- 4 A: Right. 5 Q: -- he advised that it would be good 6 if you left the scene. 7 A: Something like that, yeah. I've got 8 it in my notebook, or -- 9 Q: Yes. And I'm summarizing that. And 10 you did leave? 11 A: Shortly thereafter, yeah. We had a 12 little more conversation, but yes. 13 Q: Okay. So your personal safety was 14 never actually threatened? 15 A: I took -- I took them to -- him to be 16 a threat, sure I did. He was tapping a baseball bat in 17 his hand while he was talking to me. 18 Q: Okay. And as a result of that and 19 other information, I take it you considered that there 20 was a serious public safety issue in the sandy parking 21 lot? 22 A: I thought there was a public safety 23 issues, yeah, sure. I would agree with you, yes. 24 Q: Well, you've described it that -- 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: -- way. 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: All right. And as a result of that, 4 I take it you don't disagree with the official position 5 that the situation in the parking lot became safer by 6 sending down two (2) CMU teams and two (2) TRU teams? 7 A: Well, I -- there's a huge leap you've 8 just made, sir, so I disagree with you. That's -- 9 Q: I'm aware that there's a huge leap. 10 A: Okay. Well, I -- 11 Q: That maybe -- 12 A: At -- at this point -- 13 Q: -- what this Inquiry's about. 14 A: -- we disagree. At this point we 15 disagree, I guess. It's fair then because CMU and ERT 16 did not move down because at 6:00 -- seven o'clock at 17 night or 7:30 at night there were up to eight (8) 18 individuals and perhaps, you know, four (4) of them armed 19 with bats. 20 That's not why CMU moved down the road at 21 9:45 or whatever it was, 10:45, I'm summarizing, too, 22 that night. 23 Q: Okay. Now, I've noted through your 24 evidence in some of the cross-examination when -- when 25 decisions became debatable, you've frequently said that


1 it was not your call. 2 And I take it what you're referring to is 3 someone else who was a superior -- of superior rank is 4 making the actual decisions and that it's not your 5 responsibility? 6 A: Okay, sure. 7 Q: If that's not fair -- 8 A: I was making the point -- 9 Q: -- please -- 10 A: Yeah. I'm making the point that 11 Inspector Carson was in charge, yes. 12 Q: Okay. But even so when we look at 13 the communications that you were having, you know, we 14 find very militaristic and, you know, almost warmongering 15 terminology. 16 And you've been asked about, you know, the 17 profanity that you use which I take it was not uncommon 18 in very -- in the trade at the time or even over the 19 radio, but the terminology you know we're -- we're going 20 off to war, we're sending in the Marines you know, what 21 do you say we go get those guys, you're really a 22 cheerleader for aggressive action aren't you? 23 A: Well, no, I -- I mean I appreciate 24 that it can be taken that way. I didn't mean it that 25 way. It was a metaphor that I used at the time to try


1 and describe a different -- you know I used those 2 comments at a different place and we've gone over them 3 and no doubt I could have -- you know in hindsight I 4 could have used a better term. 5 But again it was strictly a metaphor to 6 try to explain the situation with whomever I was talking 7 with at the time. 8 Q: Okay. Now, perhaps things are 9 different in -- in police society but when you said for 10 example to -- I believe it was Mr. McCabe, We're sending 11 in the Marines -- 12 A: Right. 13 Q: -- an average person would interpret 14 that to mean we're sending in armed troops. 15 A: Well, I guess that's your 16 interpretation. Again, I think Mr. McCabe has given 17 evidence to what he interpreted what it was I said and I 18 don't take issue with what it is I said and I don't have 19 any problem with the point I think that you're trying to 20 make that, you know, perhaps better terminology could 21 have been used. I don't take issue with that in any way, 22 shape, or form. 23 Q: And of course what happened was 24 people who would not normally be described as troops but 25 who were armed were sent in --


1 A: Police, yeah, sure. 2 Q: -- immediately after you said they 3 would be. 4 A: Okay. I don't take issue with that. 5 Q: And your evidence is that you did not 6 intend the ordinary meaning of those words even though 7 what -- the ordinary meaning is exactly what happened? 8 A: Well, okay, if we're talking about -- 9 you -- you started generally speaking about these terms-- 10 Q: Yeah. 11 A: -- and now I think we're talking 12 about specifically with Mr. McCabe. Is that where we're 13 at now just so we're -- 14 Q: I'm talking specifically about 15 sending in the Marines, yes. 16 A: Okay. Well, when I said that to Mr. 17 McCabe as I've given in my evidence-in-chief that was 18 what I thought. I -- I was relaying to him what I 19 thought might happen and in -- and in fact that's what 20 happened, a number of -- 21 Q: Hmm hmm. 22 A: -- heavily armed officers, and I 23 don't take issue with that -- 24 Q: Yeah. 25 A: -- went down there and there was a


1 confrontation. 2 Q: Okay. And the other terminology and 3 -- and I know we've gone over it several times but -- 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: -- really when you look at, What do 6 you say we go get those guys and that's what happened it 7 doesn't sound like a metaphor. 8 A: Well, that wasn't a metaphor I'm -- I 9 mean I was using profanity there to describe those 10 individuals, their actions, and my point was again I've 11 given the evidence that I thought we needed to move -- I 12 was making the point that we needed to move them out of 13 that area; whether they went into the Park or we arrest 14 them, either way, either option was fine with me but we 15 had -- we couldn't let that continue. 16 Q: And when you told a third individual 17 we're going to war...? 18 A: Yeah, I don't remember when that was. 19 Who was that? Can you help me with that? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: I'm just refreshing my recollection-- 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: -- of a familiar source.


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: It may -- it may also have been -- 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: -- Mr. McCabe. I thought it might 6 have been Superintendent Parkin. The record of course is 7 clear on that. 8 So essentially you will agree with me I 9 hope that when you say, We're going to war in a hockey 10 stadium or at a baseball field that's a metaphor? 11 A: Sure. 12 Q: When you say, We're going to war in 13 the sense of an armed conflict, when you have armed and 14 trained people to send into that situation that would not 15 normally be taken as a metaphor would it? 16 A: Well, no, I disagree with you. I 17 didn't -- I didn't anticipate that the officers were 18 going to go down there and a war was going to break out. 19 I didn't mean it in its literal term. 20 I mean it's -- it's -- I didn't mean it 21 that way. I meant it as -- I tried to explain to the -- 22 the lawyer from MAG of the situation that was going on at 23 that particular moment, because we were talking about 24 service of the injunction and my evidence the next 25 morning.


1 So I was trying to give him a -- a brief 2 overview of what the situation was, as I saw it, at that 3 particular time. 4 Q: All right. So when you talked about 5 using the troops, if I can use that language myself, and 6 you say you didn't mean war, you didn't think that actual 7 fighting would break out? 8 A: No. I was hopeful that CM -- the 9 whole idea of a CMU is, you know, it's an overwhelming 10 number of officers in a very intimidating formation and 11 the idea of that is that when people come across 12 something like that, they leave the area. And that's the 13 whole point of a CMU unit, really, is -- is their mere 14 presence suggests that one should leave the area. 15 Q: And that's what you had in mind? 16 A: I was -- I was hopeful -- I was 17 hopeful that that was going to happen, but I was 18 concerned -- I mean, you know, I didn't know what was 19 going to happen for sure. 20 Q: Ah, yes. But the situation you've 21 described is the situation that you anticipated when you 22 made the decision to hold back the day team into the 23 night hours? 24 A: I don't understand your question, 25 sir.


1 Q: The CMU team was going to go off 2 shift. 3 A: No. You're incorrect. They're not a 4 CMU team. That's an ERT -- 5 Q: I'm sorry. 6 A: -- team. 7 Q: Okay. 8 A: An ERT -- a number of ERT officers -- 9 a number of ERT officers coming together -- 10 Q: Right. 11 A: -- are comprise -- comprise a CMU 12 unit. That's one of the many functions that an ERT team 13 can do. My intent on holding the ERT -- day shift ERT, 14 was to allow the incident commander the maximum number of 15 officers to deal with the issue in whichever way that he 16 wanted to. 17 Q: Okay. And at the time you made that 18 decision, neither Inspector Linton nor Inspector Carson 19 was aware that there was an issue that had to be dealt 20 with, were they? 21 A: No, I think they -- I think they 22 were. I think I'd been on the radio and while en route 23 to Forest Detachment, I alerted them to my concerns. And 24 we've been over that radio log -- 25 Q: Yes.


1 A: -- a number of times. So I think the 2 command post was alive that there was something wrong 3 down there, as far as I was concerned, and I held back 4 the day shift upon getting to Forest Detachment. 5 Q: And we are agreed that was your 6 decision and your decision -- 7 A: Absolutely. 8 Q: -- alone? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: Okay. Thank you, Inspector Wright. 11 I can advise, Commissioner, that the Chiefs of Ontario 12 office is not going to be questioning this witness. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 14 Mr. Henderson. 15 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Thank you, sir. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 17 very much, Mr. Henderson. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I believe 22 we're up to Mr. Falconer now. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Just a minute to 2 set up. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Sure, by all 4 means. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: Good afternoon, Inspector Wright. 10 A: Good afternoon. 11 Q: And, I'm sorry, it's Staff Inspector 12 Wright? 13 A: No, just Inspector. 14 Q: Thank you. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Can you assist me on Wade Lacroix's 19 role, in -- in general, and then I'm going to move to 20 specifics, because I -- I have some confusion in that 21 regard, and you might be able to clarify for me. 22 Could you direct your attention, please, 23 to Tab 9 of Commission Counsel documents? 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)


1 2 Q: And while you're looking for Tab 9, I 3 didn't do my client justice, I -- I should point out to 4 you, sir, that my name is Julian Falconer, but I act on 5 behalf of Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. 6 A: Tab 9. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 A: Yes, sir. 11 Q: At Tab 9 of Commission counsel 12 documents, it's a package of materials, if you look at 13 the index it refers to -- to training materials and 14 memorandums. 15 And the document number -- 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Exhibit P-1093. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 19 Q: It's Exhibit P for Peter, 1093. And I 20 think Mr. Millar's going to be helping me a lot on -- on 21 the exhibit numbers, as usual. It may be worse than 22 usual, but I apologize. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's helped 24 us all. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: In addition to training materials, 3 I'm just trying to refresh your memory, Inspector Wright. 4 In addition to training materials there's a number of 5 memos and -- and that's what I -- initially I want to ask 6 you to take a look at for a minute. 7 And I don't believe you've been asked 8 about these particular memos. I -- I do that self- 9 servingly so Mr. Commissioner knows I'm going to new 10 paper. 11 If you turn three (3) pages in you should 12 find a memo dated May 30th, 1994; is that fair? 13 Do you see the memo of May 30th? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Now, Mr. Millar asked you about it, 16 but he didn't line by line with you about it, and that's 17 probably mercifully. I, unfortunately, have to to some 18 extent; you'll bear with me. 19 The first one thing I want to establish is 20 the context for this memorandum, as -- as you've 21 testified to Mr. Millar, the context is a scenario of 22 your interpretation of a complex policing situation and 23 involving Camp Ipperwash and the West Ipperwash Beach 24 area, correct? 25 That's the context for you issuing this


1 memo to fellow officers? 2 A: I thought it was West Ipperwash 3 Beach. 4 Q: Only? 5 A: Ipperwash -- I stand to be corrected, 6 sir, but I think this is in dealing with -- 7 Q: All right. 8 A: -- West Ipperwash -- May 30th '94. I 9 -- I think so, without reading the whole thing over again 10 but -- 11 Q: Fair enough. If you -- you could 12 well be right and to be fair to you, if you flip back two 13 (2) pages, you'll see that there is a memorandum from 14 Wade Lacroix relating to CFB Ipperwash. 15 A: Right. 16 Q: Okay. So Lacroix does a memo on CFB 17 Ipperwash or Sergeant Lacroix at the time. You do a memo 18 dealing with Ipperwash West; is that right? 19 A: Well I don't know because it doesn't 20 -- I don't know if they -- they go out as a package. 21 Q: I don't mean at the same time. 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: I just mean that -- 24 A: This is what is in front of me. 25 Q: Yes.


1 A: I agree. 2 Q: Okay. And your memo, as it deals 3 with West Ipperwash, for a moment, let's accept it's only 4 West Ipperwash area. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: Your memo is meant to address the 7 difficulty of policing, given the opinion that's been 8 received contemporaneous to May 1994, that in view of the 9 civil action launched by members of the First Nations 10 community in the area, Kettle and Stony Point, and the -- 11 the legal position you've gotten from the Crown's office, 12 basically there is a colour of right issue and therefore 13 trespassing charges would likely have no reasonable 14 prospect of conviction, correct? 15 A: Agreed. 16 Q: And it's fair to say that you refer, 17 virtually right off the top, in terms of explaining to 18 fellow enforcement officers, it's fair to say that you 19 explain right off the top, quote: 20 "As you were aware it would appear we 21 are in for a long hot summer in and 22 around the Ipperwash area." 23 A: Right. 24 Q: Correct? 25 A: Right.


1 Q: Then you say: 2 "We are going to be caught in the 3 middle and there's no way around it." 4 A: Right. 5 Q: "This memo is intended to hopefully 6 clear some of the confusion surrounding 7 what our position will be with respect 8 to policing in the area where the 9 cottagers are located on Ipperwash 10 Beach." 11 A: Right. 12 Q: "On Monday evening, 16th of May, 13 Acting Inspector Matthew, Sergeant 14 McDonald and Hamilton, myself and a 15 representative from the Legal Branch 16 attended at a meeting at District 17 Headquarters with representatives of 18 the Ipperwash Cottage Owners 19 Association. 20 The purpose of this meeting was to 21 address the concerns of the Association 22 with respect to the type of policing 23 they could expect to receive from the 24 Ontario Provincial Police. 25 The Readers Digest version of what they


1 had to say can be summed up by saying 2 that they were under the impression 3 that they were to receive little to no 4 action on our part when they called for 5 police to deal with Natives [quote] 6 'harassing' [close quotes] them, their 7 families, and their property." 8 You wrote that? 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: And it's accurate? 11 A: Yeah, I wrote it. 12 Q: And it's accurate? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Okay. Well, you could write it and 15 it could be inaccurate later -- 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: -- so I have to be a lawyer and check 18 all the boxes. 19 A: Okay. Got it, got it. 20 Q: Right. And now, in referring to the 21 views of the cottagers that they would receive little or 22 not action by police in respect of Natives, quote, 23 "harassing them," you're actually reflecting a view you 24 subsequently received on September 6th, 1995, in and 25 around 6:00 p.m., when you met with the cottage community


1 around the sandy parking lot; isn't that right? 2 You got a similar view then? 3 A: Yeah, okay, sure. 4 Q: All right. And you said, in respect 5 of the views stated here, this is where we stand with 6 respect to the land problem and conflict between the 7 cottage owners and the Natives. 8 This is what you say to fellow enforcement 9 officers, yes? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: And I take it it's fair to say that 12 when -- it's Detective Sergeant Mark Wright at the time, 13 right? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: When Detective Sergeant Mark Wright 16 is speaking on this issue in this memorandum, he's 17 speaking as a senior officer in crime enforcement in the 18 area? 19 A: Sure. 20 Q: Yes? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: All right. And he's speaking as a 23 very high placed official in the OPP ranks in terms of on 24 the ground management of Ipperwash. 25 A: No.


1 Q: Right? 2 A: No. 3 Q: You're not high ranking in terms on 4 the ground -- 5 A: I'm a sergeant. 6 Q: No, but you were high ranking in 7 terms of on the ground management? 8 A: This is May '94, sir. 9 Q: Yeah. 10 A: West -- we're talking about West 11 Ipperwash Beach -- 12 Q: Hmm hmm. 13 A: -- area. This was a detachment 14 policing problem in and around that area. So I was just 15 -- I was the crime management person there and I think 16 it's -- I wasn't -- I didn't consider myself a high 17 ranking officer there. 18 But I certainly wrote this and I was the 19 crime person and I -- I agree with you with all that, 20 but. 21 Q: Who was higher ranking than you on 22 the ground managing Ipperwash at the time? 23 A: Well, Staff Sergeant Lacroix would be 24 senior to -- would be senior to me. 25 Q: He was managing Ipperwash at the


1 time? 2 A: He was -- he was the Detachment 3 Commander. 4 Q: Was he managing Ipperwash at the 5 time? 6 A: Well... 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: Mr. Millar thinks I should 11 distinguish between CFB Ipperwash and -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And West 13 Ipperwash Beach. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Ipperwash -- 15 West Ipperwash. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 19 Q: I take the point. So let's deal with 20 -- because I thought you would have understood by virtue 21 of the memo we're on. I'm talking about Ipperwash West. 22 Who was the senior -- 23 A: I understand that. 24 Q: -- ranking officer on the ground 25 managing Ipperwash West at the time?


1 A: Well, it's -- I'm trying to answer 2 your question, sir. 3 Q: Sure. 4 A: Like, if -- if there was a call that 5 required me to be there, then I would go, but there -- 6 there were other -- it was just a detachment policing 7 problem. I guess specific to this land claim, this 8 issue, they would notify me. But uniformed sergeants 9 would take these incidents as they came and dealt with 10 them -- and deal with them at the time. 11 I was providing -- doing this because I 12 felt that we needed a comprehensive, an even-handed 13 approach to the situation. 14 So -- and as you can see at the end of the 15 memo Lacroix puts his footnote on here and I think he 16 says that -- here it is right here. It says: 17 "I have been appointed the Incident 18 Commander for both West Ipperwash Beach 19 and the Army Camp." 20 So I guess your answer would be Lacroix. 21 Q: And going back to my question I said 22 you were one (1) of the highest ranking officers on the 23 ground dealing with Ipperwash West -- 24 A: And I disagree with you -- 25 Q: All right.


1 A: I was a sergeant. 2 Q: Other than Lacroix, was there anybody 3 else you can think of? 4 A: I -- 5 Q: Other than Lacroix, was there anyone 6 else you can think of that was managing West Ipperwash at 7 the time -- high ranking officer? 8 A: No. 9 Q: No? Now, and I do want to get to 10 that addendum at the end of the memo. I plan to and -- 11 A: Yeah. I -- sir, I -- I don't want to 12 mislead you. I mean I certainly had -- or have it appear 13 that I mislead you -- I certainly was involved in this. 14 Q: Yes. 15 A: I don't want to make it -- I don't 16 want to leave that impression that I wasn't involved, I 17 just -- I wasn't -- I was a sergeant. There was a whole 18 bunch of sergeants down there but I was an area crime 19 sergeant; that was Lacroix's detachment area and he was 20 the guy in charge -- overall in charge of that specific 21 incident. But I was certainly involved as well. 22 Q: And you were involved in the 23 management of the incident? 24 A: Well, I guess, because I helped with 25 this memo so I -- sure.


1 Q: You didn't help with the memo, you 2 drafted the memo? 3 A: Right. Right. 4 Q: Right. Now, you say this is where we 5 stand with respect to the land problem and conflict 6 between the cottage owners and the Natives. 7 A: Right. 8 Q: And you've outlined paragraphs 1 and 9 2 about the existence of colour of right that I already 10 reviewed with you. Then -- 11 A: Right. 12 Q: -- moving to the next page, it's not 13 every document, Mr. Commissioner, I'm going line by line, 14 but this -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- one's 17 particularly relevant, I would submit. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 20 Q: The next page, paragraph 4, the top 21 of the page. Do you see that, it starts with 22 "accordingly?" 23 A: Yes, I do. 24 Q: Right, because we reviewed the issue 25 of trespassing, that there exists colour of right, and


1 that therefore there's not a reasonable prospect of 2 conviction on trespass charges. And then you say, quote: 3 "Accordingly, we have been instructed 4 not to lay Trespass to Property charges 5 pursuant to the POA with respect to 6 incidents involving Natives on the 7 front side and back yard areas of homes 8 on the beach." 9 You see that? 10 A: Yeah. 11 Q: Then you say, quote: 12 "That's what we can't do. Now here's 13 what you can do when called to an 14 occurrence in this area." 15 A: Right. 16 Q: You then proceed, am I right, to list 17 the various enforcement actions officers can take, 18 correct? 19 A: Well, some examples. I don't think - 20 - that's not all encompassing, right. 21 Q: Didn't mean to -- 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: Accepting that. You list examples of 24 the various enforcement actions officers can take, in 25 your opinion?


1 A: Right. 2 Q: As an officer involved in managing 3 the situation. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: And it really is somewhat of a recipe 6 on different ways officers can take, quote, "action," 7 close quotes; isn't that right? 8 A: Well -- 9 Q: I use the word "quotes," because if 10 you look at paragraph 3: 11 "Here are a few examples of Sections of 12 the Code I suggest will be handy tools 13 that will allow you to take action." 14 You see that? 15 A: Right. 16 Q: And then next paragraph: 17 "Or let us say you get a call from a 18 cottage owner there are Natives in his 19 or her front lawn." 20 A: Hmm hmm. 21 Q: "Will fit this occurrence and allow 22 you to take action." 23 You see that? 24 A: Yes, I do. 25 Q: Yeah. And it's fair to say that you


1 are addressing the notion, as you put it on a previous 2 page, of inaction, no action, right? 3 You remember how you say the cottagers say 4 we're taking no action, you -- 5 A: Right. 6 Q: -- say that? 7 A: Right. 8 Q: And now you give a recipe of how you 9 can take action; isn't that right? 10 A: Sure. 11 Q: Okay. And it's fair to say that in 12 giving this recipe on how you can take action, you 13 actually make a point at paragraph 6 of saying: 14 "Be advised you will, in all 15 likelihood, be videotaped by the 16 cottage owners and maybe the Natives. 17 Don't lose your cool, stay 18 professional, and remember, if you're 19 unsure, call for help." 20 You say that. 21 A: Hmm hmm. 22 Q: And at paragraph 7, next page: 23 "Remember, we are a neutral entity, we 24 will take enforcement action against 25 anyone who breaks the law regardless of


1 race." 2 You say that. 3 A: Right. 4 Q: And then to end, you say: 5 "I hope this clears the situation for 6 you and I'll be happy to answer any 7 questions you may have as a result of 8 this memo." 9 A: Right. 10 Q: Now, you've offered yourself as a 11 resource to all the officers taking action, potentially, 12 if they need help? 13 A: Right. 14 Q: You've instructed them to not to, 15 quote, "lose your cool," close quotes, right? 16 A: Right. 17 Q: How do you reconcile the notion with 18 maintaining your cool and quote, "going to fucking war," 19 close quotes. How do you reconcile those two (2) 20 notions? 21 A: Well, one doesn't have anything to do 22 with the other, sir. 23 Q: Do you think you maintained your cool 24 when you told McCabe you were, "going to fucking war?" 25 A: Well I don't think I -- I didn't -- I


1 don't think I said exactly that, but -- 2 Q: "We're going to fucking war." Did 3 you maintain your cool when you told McCabe, "we're going 4 to fucking war?" 5 A: Yes, I think I did. 6 Q: All right. 7 A: I think I was explaining to him, as I 8 said, I was giving him a -- a -- a overview of what was - 9 - what I thought was taking place there. 10 Q: On September 5th, 1995, when you told 11 Inspector Robertson that you were acting on behalf of MNR 12 and you were going to be taking the Park once you got the 13 piece of paper, the injunction, when you told him that, 14 were you maintaining your cool? 15 A: Absolutely. 16 Q: All right. And it's important 17 because it could have been a slip of the tongue in the 18 heat of the moment, but it's your evidence that you 19 actually, quite dispassionately, viewed yourself as 20 acting on behalf of MNR, correct? 21 A: Dispassionately? 22 Q: That means in a cool, level-headed 23 fashion -- 24 A: I -- 25 Q: -- you considered the matter and you


1 considered yourself, quote, "to be acting on behalf of 2 MNR," correct? 3 A: They -- I considered them to be the 4 complainant in this occurrence, yes. 5 Q: Sir, I appreciate that you've 6 testified many times, so I don't have to explain the 7 notion of answering the question. 8 The question was -- 9 A: I am answering the question -- 10 Q: Did you consider yourself to be 11 acting on behalf of MNR, not -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 13 minute. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- not -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 16 minute, Mr. Falconer, calm down, calm down. 17 MR. MARK SANDLER: Yes, I wonder if Mr. 18 Falconer could keep his cool. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 20 Falconer, that would be a good suggestion. 21 MR. MARK SANDLER: But with great -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just calm 23 down and ask the question. 24 MR. MARK SANDLER: With great respect, 25 that was responsive to the question, because in


1 examination-in-chief he was asked what he meant by this, 2 and he gave the same answer. So he is -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 4 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- being responsive. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: He's being 6 consistent, that's true. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: He's being 9 consistent, I -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 11 Falconer, just ask the question. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- agree with that. 13 I can do -- I can do this so that we don't spend a lot of 14 time -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, we can 16 spend as much as we need. Ask the question in a calm, 17 cool manner. 18 MR. DERRY MILLAR: It might be -- and I 19 know My Friend, Mr. Falconer, simply misspoke himself. 20 But in the conversation with -- between the Witness and 21 Mr. McCabe, which appears at -- it's part of Exhibit P- 22 463. Mr. Wright said: 23 "We're going to -- we're going to war 24 now, we're not going to be serving 25 anyone."


1 He didn't use the expletive for that in 2 this conversation that My Friend attributed to him, in 3 this conversation. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I apologize because 5 he used it -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Carry on Mr. 7 Falconer. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- so I -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just ask 10 the -- 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I apologize, Mr. 12 Miller is correct. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 15 Q: When you said, without the word 16 'fucking', We're going to war -- 17 A: That wasn't the point I was making -- 18 Q: -- your answer is the same, correct, 19 as -- with or without that expletive? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And I appreciate that and I 22 apologize. Now, going back to my question, what I had 23 said was that it's important that you were cool in those 24 circumstances, and I was at September 5th, '95, when you 25 said to Inspector Robertson, a senior, a superior of


1 yours, correct? 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: When you said to him, we're acting on 4 behalf on MNR, you were saying that and using those words 5 in a level headed, cool fashion, right? 6 A: Agreed. 7 Q: Right. And when I asked you about 8 that just now, you said they were the complainant. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: But the point that over here, and 11 that's why I'm so interested in this, is that -- 12 paragraph 7, page 3 of the memo of May 30th, 1994: 13 "Remember we are a neutral entity." 14 Did you stop being neutral? 15 Page three of the memo. 16 A: Where are you talking about being -- 17 Q: Paragraph 7, page three. 18 A: The question is: Did you stop being 19 neutral. Where, which one are you talking about; here, 20 West Ipperwash Beach or September 5? 21 Q: All right. Let.s take a step back. 22 Is your point then that in the West Ipperwash situation 23 you were neutral, but in the Ipperwash Park incident you 24 were no longer neutral. 25 Is that your point?


1 A: No, my point is -- 2 Q: Okay. 3 A: I was trying to answer your question. 4 Q: No, fair enough, I just want to make 5 sure that's not your point. Your point is, you still 6 thought you had to be a neutral entity, didn.t you? 7 A: Absolutely -- 8 Q: Okay, yeah -- 9 A: -- you had to deal fairly with 10 people, absolutely. 11 Q: Well, not just about being fair, 12 because you can be fair and not neutral. 13 A: Sir -- 14 Q: You can be part of a hockey team -- 15 A: Right -- 16 Q: -- and go down the ice and follow all 17 the rules and be fair and never neutral. You can be 18 neutral and never fair. I want to know -- 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: -- specifically when it came to 21 Ipperwash Park and enforcing the law at Ipperwash Park, 22 did you continue to view it as an imperative for the OPP 23 to remain neutral? 24 A: Sure. 25 Q: All right.


1 A: But, the -- there's -- you're apples 2 and oranges, sir. West Ipperwash Beach there was colour 3 of right, as I understood it. At Ipperwash Provincial 4 Park, as I've given in my evidence in-Chief, I was of 5 the mindset that there was no colour of right and that 6 MNR -- or the Province and MNR being the landlord had -- 7 there was no doubt as to ownership. 8 So that's where I stood with respect to 9 the difference between West Ipperwash and Ipperwash 10 Provincial Park, if that helps. 11 Q: No, it does help, and you had 12 explained that to Mr. Scullion, as well as to others, and 13 I did understand that. But I -- and I got all that, and 14 with all of that -- 15 A: Right. 16 Q: -- that doesn't change your answer 17 that it was as important to be neutral in respect of 18 Ipperwash Park as it was in respect of West Ipperwash, 19 correct? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: All right. And in accepting it was 22 important to be neutral, do you think you would be viewed 23 as or be acting neutrally if you were acting, quote, "on 24 behalf of the complainant," close quotes? 25 A: Well, again, I was talking to an


1 Inspector and he said -- you know, you have to take it in 2 the context, sir, if I may. Mark what's going on there? 3 I'm the duty officer and I don't know what's going on. 4 Well, I gave him a rundown of what I thought was going 5 on. 6 And my position was, and we've been over 7 that, I don't want to take up your time here about where 8 I stood in respect of that, so -- 9 Q: Well, I want you to take your time 10 because if I ask you questions in a critical fashion you 11 have to always feel free to give a full answer. So -- 12 A: Well, I'm -- 13 Q: Now, if you could turn to Tab 20, 14 because you're saying that I have to take it into 15 context, if you turn to Tab 20, September 5th, 1995, 16 10:42 a.m., it's a Commission Counsel document. 17 A: Yes, sir. 18 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Exhibit P-1098. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 21 Q: Now as I understand the OPP policy on 22 the issue of an injunctions and you went over this so I'm 23 only doing a summary. I'm not cross-examining you on 24 what the policy was. 25 The policy was simple. We're a neutral


1 entity and if a landowner in -- in a dispute wants the 2 law enforced, an injunction is obtained by the landowner 3 and we follow the law; that's the policy. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: Okay. And you knew that was the 6 policy in and around September 4th, 1995? 7 A: No, I didn't know that there was that 8 document from I think -- no. 9 Q: No, I meant you knew generally that 10 that was the -- the role of the OPP? 11 A: No. This was the first land claim 12 that I was involved with of this issue so, no. I didn't 13 know this was generally the policy of the OPP. This was 14 my first land claim issue incident. 15 Q: You were involved in the Camp 16 Ipperwash CFB Ipperwash investigations, laying of 17 charges -- 18 A: Right. 19 Q: -- dating back to May 1993. 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And you knew that was the policy 22 pursued by the OPP with the Canadian Armed Forces. 23 A: You're right as far -- with respect 24 to the -- when the damage, et cetera, happened at the 25 takeover of the Camp, you're right. I stand to be


1 corrected. He was -- because I think Carson told him 2 that if they wanted action on our part, we had to get an 3 injunction. 4 So I stand corrected on that. I mean, 5 that was -- I -- I heard that earlier. So I would be 6 alive to that. 7 Q: To be fair, sir, in addition to 8 hearing it, and this is the part that matters to me, it's 9 one thing if you're a line officer or a constable and I 10 don't want to denigrate constables they know lots of 11 things. 12 But as a -- as a manager, not only are you 13 alive to the policy, your job is to enforce the policy 14 with, not only the people you're policing but your 15 subordinates, right? 16 A: Sure. 17 Q: Okay. And so as of September 4th, 18 1995, you in a managerial capacity, second, right? Mr. 19 Carson called you -- the Incident Commander called you 20 his right hand man. That's a very flattering term. 21 That's what he called you. 22 A: Okay. 23 Q: You saw in the evidence. 24 A: Hmm hmm, yes. 25 Q: All right. You are second in command


1 to -- to Incident Commander Carson and -- and as of 2 September 4th, 1995, you would have known that the OPP 3 took the position that if a landowner wanted to see 4 enforcement action, then the idea was that the landowner 5 went and got an injunction and if the court so ordained 6 you'd enforce the law. 7 You knew that was the way it worked. 8 A: Well sir, I think I've answered your 9 question. You -- you corrected me and I appreciate that 10 that I was aware of it at CFB Ipperwash. 11 I -- I didn't know -- yes, CFB Ipperwash 12 and then we went down to Ipperwash Provincial Park. My 13 understanding of your question was, did I understand that 14 was general OPP policy. 15 Well I didn't understand that was general 16 OPP policy. I know that's how we were dealing with the 17 Base and the Park. 18 Q: Okay. And my question and the reason 19 you and I are going back and forth is I asked, as of 20 September 4th, 1995 in respect to the Park. And this is 21 the first time you're actually saying to me, yes, that's 22 what I knew in respect to the Park. Fair enough. 23 A: Okay. 24 Q: So that's the context for the 25 exchange with your superior Inspector Robertson in which


1 a number of discussions around armaments, ammunition, 2 helicopters, is happening. 3 A: Right. 4 Q: Yes? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: And you've said you maintained your 7 cool so this wasn't about impassioned, boiling blood, you 8 know, you -- you were completely -- 9 A: I was talking to the guy. 10 Q: Right. And you knew you were talking 11 to a superior -- 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: -- and you knew you were discharging 14 your obligations and it's in that context at page 2 -- 15 could you turn to page 2? 16 A: Sure. 17 Q: At 10:42 in the morning of September 18 5th, right, there's no -- there's no alleged escalation 19 of activities, right? The morning of September 5th, 20 1995 -- 21 A: No. 22 Q: -- things are stable, right? 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: You say to him, MNR of course were 25 acting on behalf of MNR. You say that?


1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: And I'm going to suggest to you that 3 if you are acting on behalf of one of the parties to the 4 dispute, you are no longer neutral, would you agree with 5 that? 6 A: I see your point. I take your point 7 but -- 8 Q: All right. 9 A: -- again you have to take this in the 10 context of what was going on. My understanding was that 11 they -- they -- the property, the Provincial Park was the 12 property of the Province, they were the complainant and 13 there was no doubt in my mind as to lawful ownership of 14 that property. 15 Q: I understand. 16 A: So, you know, perhaps -- perhaps my 17 saying that the term 'neutral' perhaps is -- is 18 misleading on my part, because I -- I think I've made 19 that point clear many, many times that my feeling, my 20 mind set was that the Province of Ontario was the lawful 21 owner of that property. 22 Q: There's something fundamental I'm 23 asking you about and it's not the issue of whether 24 there's a slip of the tongue because you've testified 25 that there wasn't.


1 I'm asking you another question which is: 2 Isn't it fair to say that because of your view that there 3 was no colour of right you did view yourself as acting, 4 quote, "on behalf of MNR" isn't that right? 5 A: As the Complainant, yeah. They were 6 the Complainant. 7 Q: Well, -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- when you say, "right" -- 10 A: I'm not taking issue with that, sir. 11 Q: Okay. So you agree with the last 12 proposition I just made to you? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Thank you. Now, if we go back down 15 the page: 16 "Okay. Absolutely. No doubt 17 whatsoever about that. So at eleven 18 o'clock this morning the MNR and all 19 their Ministry levels are meeting and 20 they're going to get us an injunction 21 because that's what we want, we want a 22 piece of paper. 23 Hmm hmm. 24 And our intention is to go back in and 25 take that Park."


1 A: Right. 2 Q: Who are you taking the Park for? 3 A: Who are we taking the Park for? 4 Q: We're going in. 5 A: Right. 6 Q: We go back in and take that Park. 7 Who are we taking the Park for? 8 A: Well, we were going to -- my -- what 9 I meant by that we were going to return the Park back to 10 their lawful owners with the injunction. 11 Q: You do -- you do see the difference 12 in the words you used as a cool professional on September 13 5th, 1995 -- 14 A: Hmm hmm. 15 Q: -- and the words you're using now as 16 a Witness in front of the Commissioner on March 21st, 17 2006. You didn't say, We're going to go to the Park once 18 an injunction is obtained and return the Park if the 19 Court so orders to its lawful owner as a neutral entity. 20 What you said is, We're going to take the Park. 21 A: Right. 22 Q: Right. Now, taking is -- stands in 23 stark contrast to, for example, receiving right? Taking 24 implies a proactive measure right? 25 A: Agreed.


1 Q: Taking doesn't just mean cohabitate, 2 I think that's the word Mr. Sandler like -- I tried to 3 find cohabitate in any of the materials; maybe you can 4 help me. I tried to find it if it happened before this 5 Inquiry, the words 'cohabitate'. They -- they could be 6 there; I haven't found them yet. 7 Leaving aside that you -- you folks are 8 using the word 'cohabitate' and there's another word. 9 A: Repopulate? 10 Q: Repopulate. 11 A: That -- that's the other one. 12 Q: That -- that's a word in this 13 Inquiry. Do you actually remember using 'cohabitate' or 14 'repopulate' in September 1995? 15 A: Well, it was -- I don't recall, sir, 16 it was eleven (11) years ago. 17 Q: Okay. Because cohabitate or 18 repopulate, that's not really the same as taking the Park 19 is it? 20 A: No. 21 Q: No. 22 A: We're talking about two (2) different 23 things. It's -- 24 Q: You talked -- 25 A: -- there's two (2) different


1 discussions going on here. 2 Q: Sure. You talked about if you had 3 any notion, this is what you said in examination-in- 4 chief, if you had any notion that there was colour of 5 right this wouldn't be -- and this is what you said in- 6 chief -- this wouldn't be a police action; do you 7 remember saying that? 8 A: No. 9 Q: You don't remember using the words 10 'police action'? 11 A: No, but I don't take issue. If -- 12 you know I'm sure you've looked at it. I'm sure that's 13 accurate I just don't remember. 14 Q: Well, to be fair to you I will draw 15 your attention to the reference, but in addition you -- 16 you might disagree with that now and that's a different 17 issue. 18 In other words do you now, talking to me 19 as you're talking now, if you had thought it was a 20 situation of colour of right would it be a police action 21 as you understood it at the time? 22 A: Well, it would still be -- we would 23 still have a problem wouldn't we? 24 Q: But you wouldn't have a police action 25 because that's what you said in your chief correct?


1 A: Well, I -- I don't know what I said 2 back then and again I don't take issue with that. I -- I 3 suspect what I meant was you know I don't know what that 4 was in -- in context to the discussion that I was having 5 at the time. I mean you've given me one (1) -- 6 Q: It's a colour of right context. You 7 told -- 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: Just show him -- 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yeah, I'm going -- 10 I'm about to. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: You -- and as Mr. Mathai helps me by 14 getting the passage is it fair to say that when you refer 15 to take that Park and that's how we got off on this, when 16 you say, "take that Park," that's a form of police action 17 right? 18 A: Yeah, I'd say so, yes. 19 Q: Yeah. 20 A: I agree with you. 21 Q: And it's an aggressive active police 22 action, right? 23 A: Yeah, sure. It can be taken that 24 way, yeah. 25 Q: Well, in -- in fact to be fair we


1 want -- 2 A: Well, sir, it's -- it's -- 3 Q: -- want a piece of paper -- 4 A: -- in cont -- I'm having -- 5 Q: Let me finish my question. 6 "We want a piece of paper --" 7 A: Hmm hmm. 8 Q: "-- and our intention is to go back 9 in and take that Park." 10 A: Right. 11 Q: Right. So you said something about 12 context. Go on please? 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 14 minute. What's the question? 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 17 Q: Oh, all right. My question to you, 18 sir, is that it's an aggressive and active action and the 19 aggressive and active action is contemplated once you get 20 that quote, "piece of paper" that you quote "want" close 21 quotes, isn't that right? 22 A: Yeah, that's what I said. 23 Q: Yeah. And you meant it? 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: As a cool professional talking to a


1 senior? 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: Okay. And it's fair to say that if, 4 bless his memory, if -- if Clifford George were here 5 today or Sam George sitting here now, heard that you want 6 a piece of paper and your intention is to back in and 7 take that Park. 8 It is fair to say it would not be 9 unreasonable for them to be concerned about your 10 neutrality. Would it -- would it be unreasonable for 11 them to be concerned? 12 A: Well I think that's unfair. I was 13 having a private conversation with another officer who 14 wanted to be updated about what was going on. I wasn't 15 speaking to Mr. George or an audience. This was a 16 private conversation between two (2) officers and he 17 wanted to be updated. 18 And what I was telling him, you know, is 19 that we want an injunction and when we get an injunction 20 we were going to go and deal -- and take the Park, return 21 it back it back to its lawful owners with the injunction 22 document. 23 And that's what I was telling him. You 24 know, now I appreciate the -- the verbiage I used can be 25 seen as aggressive but this was a private conversation


1 between myself and the Inspector and I was very quickly 2 trying to tell him this is what we were going to do. 3 Q: The bottom of page 5, if you -- and - 4 - and you had said you got to look at context. So I'm 5 trying top be very careful to take -- 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: -- us through the context so that 8 there's nothing the Commissioner misses on context. At 9 the bottom of page 5 Inspector Robertson says -- it's 10 line about six (6), seven (7) lines up: 11 "We'll start whipping the extra 223's 12 and the ammunition. 13 MARK WRIGHT: (interrupting) Well I 14 got the ERT, like we're pretty, uh, the 15 ERT's in on 223 that's all? 16 Yeah, we got Stanley. Do we need extra 17 weaponry down here? Do you want extra 18 weapons? We're talking about 223's 19 ..." 20 And what sir are Wingmasters? Wingmasters 21 are shotguns? 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: 223's they're -- they're a very high 24 volume ammunition used by the Military among others, 25 true?


1 A: I don't know if they are used by the 2 Military. They're -- they're -- it's a Ruger 223. It's 3 a long gun that we use, the OPP. 4 Q: "Korosec..." 5 That's who Stanley is, isn't that right? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: "Yeah, we got Stanley. Do we need 8 extra weaponry?" 9 Right. So I -- I take it when you were 10 answering Mr. Scullion's questions about whether you 11 talked to Stan Korosec, you weren't talking about this 12 moment in time, you were talking about slightly later, 13 right? 14 In other words Korosec is quoted later on 15 in the piece, September 6th, as saying: 16 "I talked to -- 17 A: Right. Sometime -- 18 Q: "-- to Mark Wright, the next day" 19 A: -- earlier in the day or whatever, 20 yeah. 21 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I'm sorry that 22 conversation is of the evening of September the 5th 23 that -- 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: My apologies. 25 That's right.


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: You're talking and -- and you know 3 that Korosec -- Korosec the night of September 5th, and 4 we're going to get there, but the night of September 5th, 5 Mr. Scullion talks to you about a conversation -- 6 A: Right, right. 7 Q: -- and you say, I don't know where he 8 got that. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: And you talked about not talking to 11 Korosec -- 12 A: Right. 13 Q: -- in your memory. But certainly you 14 and I are agreed that at 10:42 or earlier that day, you 15 were talking about some very significant weaponry, yes? 16 A: Yes. That wasn't -- I -- I wasn't 17 the author of that, sir. I mean, Robertson is asking me, 18 he's telling me that he's going to send all these guns 19 down and I look at Korosec and if you listen to my 20 intonation on the tape, I mean it's, do we need these 21 guns? 22 It's got nothing to do with me. He's the 23 ERT guy and I figure that, you know, he's the one who 24 would know and, you know, the -- the discussion is here 25 in the -- in the scribe notes and I tell Robertson well


1 we don't -- it doesn't like we really need them. 2 And he says, Well I've got them anyways, 3 I'm going to sent them down. So, fair enough. 4 Q: At the top of page 6: 5 "What about when we start bringing the 6 Road Warriors down here?" 7 A: Right. Well I've explained that. 8 That's a common term used to this day to -- to -- it's a 9 police slang for police officers. That's what they -- 10 it's like I said it's used all the time to this day. 11 Q: You're -- you're the only one as a 12 witness that has used the word so far. Just -- I need 13 you to know that. Have you checked the evidence? 14 A: Well that's -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 16 minute. Yes, Mr. -- 17 MR. MARK SANDLER: Nobody's been asking 18 that. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, no, no. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's the 21 only one -- 22 MR. MARK SANDLER: This is the first time 23 the issue has been -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Incident Commander


1 Carson -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just carry 3 on. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- testified for 5 many days and never used the word 'Road Warriors'. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No one else 7 has used the word so far. That's fine. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: Right. And he says it's a commonly 11 used word. I'm just saying, did you know, you've 12 reviewed transcripts, did you know that as a term, you're 13 the first person to use it. Did you know that? 14 A: Sir, no. And I invite -- there's 15 going to be a number of officers after me. You can ask 16 them, that's a commonly -- 17 Q: Fair enough. 18 A: -- used term. 19 Q: And Road Warriors is the -- is a 20 fairly aggressive term, would you agree? 21 A: No. It's just -- 22 Q: All right. 23 A: -- you know, it's just a term. I 24 mean I appreciate where you're coming from but it's just 25 a -- it's just a term that we use to identify police


1 officers. 2 Q: And it would be anticipated that the 3 Road Warriors, those people you are commonly identifying, 4 would be helping you, quote, "Take the Park"? 5 A: No, I think they would be -- I meant 6 for them -- what I meant by Road Warriors was uniform 7 officers and I wouldn't have anticipated that if we were 8 going to act on the injunction and go into the Park we 9 wouldn't be using uniformed officers I would have 10 suspected, and this is just my opinion, that we would 11 have used the ERT officers. 12 Q: But the Road Warriors would have some 13 function in contributing to the overall operation or they 14 wouldn't be there? 15 A: Well, yeah, but you said, "take the 16 Park," so -- 17 Q: Helping you to take the Park. 18 A: I -- I took you to -- I thought you 19 said, "take the park" so -- 20 Q: Oh, I see. No, helping you -- 21 A: I was trying to make -- yeah, they'd 22 be there, right. 23 Q: Right. They'd be support. The Road 24 Warriors would be support in your efforts or operation to 25 take the Park?


1 A: Yeah, sure. 2 Q: Yeah. 3 A: Yeah, they'd be part of the 4 operation. 5 Q: All right. And now, moving along if 6 you can help me with this, I would like you to help me on 7 the transcript that I find at paragraph -- I'm sorry, P- 8 1099 and I find it at Tab 21; it's the very next tab. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: Just -- it's a brief conversation 11 between you and Inspector Robertson, it's Exhibit P-1099. 12 A: Right. 13 Q: It's a very brief conversation. If 14 you could assist me in terms of whether you find anywhere 15 in this conversation Inspector Robertson correcting you 16 on your claim of acting on behalf of MNR or on your 17 reference to taking the Park is there anything in that? 18 It's just a few minutes later that's why 19 I'm asking. You've got a senior officer that's talking 20 to you a number of minutes later. I just wanted to know, 21 do you see any -- anything there where you're told, Hey, 22 we -- we don't act on behalf of MNR, or, Hey, we're not 23 taking the Park. Do you -- do you see anything in there? 24 You have a senior officer you've expressed 25 these sentiments to and I can tell you, sir,


1 Superintendent Parkin was on the stand saying that the 2 sentiments you expressed as reflected in Tab 20 are 3 things that he did not accept and did not accept as 4 proper by way of a sentiment being expressed by a person 5 in your position. 6 So I want to know whether Inspector 7 Robertson on the other hand corrected you in any way 8 given you expressed those sentiments? 9 A: Well, the answer to your question is 10 not that I see. 11 Q: Okay. 12 A: And -- and you know you make the 13 point with Coles so I would ask that you allow me to 14 answer that. I mean, I listened to some of the evidence, 15 or the testimony that was here and -- 16 Q: It was Parkin. It was Parkin. 17 A: Okay. Parkin, yes. And Parkin was 18 given -- was never given the -- he interpreted this -- 19 this conversation -- 20 Q: Hmm hmm. 21 A: -- the way he did, but I suspect if 22 he would have heard my evidence that you'd have a 23 different situation because he wasn't there and you're 24 asking him to interpret a conversation with regards to 25 what I had -- that I had to Robertson. And I -- I think


1 I've made that quite clear in my evidence-in-chief that 2 what was going on here was one, a review and based on the 3 meeting at 09:25 about repopulating the Park and -- and I 4 know that was -- that -- that link was never made to 5 Superintendent Parkin. 6 So, you know, I don't have a problem with 7 Superintendent Parkin coming to that conclusion but he 8 was misinformed because he didn't have all the 9 information. 10 Q: He simply had what you told Inspector 11 Robertson on September 5th, 1995; that's all he had -- 12 A: Well -- 13 Q: -- when he gave that evidence, 14 correct? 15 A: -- that flows from the 9:25, sir. I 16 mean, one (1) flows exactly from the other. So yes, I 17 could understand -- I could understand anybody's 18 misinterpretation of the conversation that I had with 19 Robertson, but I think once you look at the minutes of 20 9:25 I don't see how that's -- that -- how you can be 21 left with that impression after, in my opinion. 22 Q: Thank you. Now, if we could direct 23 our mind back to the memo please, and that's the May 24 30th, 1994, memorandum -- 25 A: Right.


1 Q: -- that we're working our way 2 through? 3 In that memorandum as -- we were talking 4 about the -- the various ways you were expressing that 5 officers -- examples that officers could take action and 6 the reference to not losing your cool, if you could go 7 that last page please, actually second to last page, page 8 3? 9 A: Second last -- page 2? 10 Q: 3. 11 A: Yeah. Okay. I'm there. 12 Q: There's then this entry that you 13 quite rightly pointed out to as an addendum by Staff 14 Sergeant Lacroix; is that right? 15 He -- he adds his own memo -- 16 A: Right. 17 Q: -- on top of yours? 18 A: Right. 19 Q: And at the time, May 30th, 1994, 20 Staff Sergeant Lacroix was the Incident Commander for 21 both West Ipperwash Beach and the Army Camp; correct? 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: Not Inspector John Carson; correct? 24 A: That's what it says: 25 "I've been appointed as Incident


1 Commander for both Weth -- for both 2 West Ipperwash Beach and the Army 3 Camp." 4 As of, whatever that date was. 5 Q: May 30th, 1994. 6 A: Right. 7 Q: Well, we don't know if it's as of, we 8 just know that he has been appointed. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: It could have been earlier. 11 A: Right. 12 Q: Could have been that day. 13 A: Right. 14 Q: Does that accord with your memory? 15 A: Yeah, he was -- yeah. 16 Q: And then, of course, just on the same 17 point -- I'm sorry to skip documents, Mr. Commissioner, 18 but I just -- I think it's helpful for you to have this. 19 On this same point, if you flip... 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: To -- right to the back of the 24 package. I apologise. There's no page numbering on it, 25 so I'm at the -- the -- the still Tab 9 package.


1 A: Right. 2 Q: If you count six (6) pages in, you 3 should, if you go to the back of that package that -- 4 that's part of the Commission Counsel documents, if you 5 flip six (6) pages in -- 6 A: Right. 7 Q: -- you should see a document that has 8 a number 4 on the top of it, and says, "West Ipperwash 9 Beach area". It's a continuation of the four (4) page 10 document. 11 You see on the bottom it's signed Staff 12 Sergeant Bouwman? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: Pronounced Bouwman or Bowman. 15 A: Bouwman is how I say it. 16 Q: All right, fair enough. And fourth 17 to last paragraph, and this document is dated April 20th, 18 1995, all right? You can see that, just by going to the 19 first page. 20 A: And just bear with me a moment, if 21 you will. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: And this document indicates, fourth 2 to last paragraph on page 4: 3 "I'd ask that all North Lambton 4 personnel take the initiative to 5 actively patrol the beach area and 6 respond to calls for service in an 7 expeditious fashion. I have been 8 appointed as Incident Commander for 9 both West Ipperwash beach and the Army 10 Camp for any routine investigation or 11 occurrence. A serious occurrence will 12 result in an inspector being called 13 out." 14 Sure doesn't appear like Inspector 15 Carson's appointed at this point; would you agree with 16 that? 17 It just indicates who the incident 18 commander is for routine occurrences and an inspector 19 will be brought out if something else happens, right? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: It makes no reference to Inspector 22 Carson, correct? 23 A: Agreed. 24 Q: So as of April 20th, 1995, and 25 there's no cc'd Inspector Carson or any indication that


1 Inspector Carson's playing a role in this document, 2 correct? 3 A: That he's not playing -- I would 4 agree with you. 5 Q: And so, what we know is that the only 6 named commander in -- in April 1995, is -- is an inspect 7 -- a Sergeant Bouwman, right? 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 Q: Did I get the rank wrong? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Did I get the rank wrong? 14 A: No, no, you did -- I'm just -- I'm 15 just trying to -- yes, I would agree with you, sir. 16 Q: I only ask you that -- 17 A: It's a lot of documents to run back 18 and forth. 19 Q: I only ask you that because, perhaps 20 I'd got confused, but I'd understood that Inspector 21 Carson was Incident Commander from day 1. 22 A: Well, it was -- it was a very -- it 23 was somewhat of a confusing time then. Bouwman was in 24 charge of Forest and Lacroix was in charge of Petrolia, 25 now Lambton Detachment, and we were moving from re --


1 districts to regions. 2 And although Bouwman started as the 3 Detachment Commander and this area would fall in his area 4 of policing responsibility, my recollection is the powers 5 to be decided that this would be better off managed by 6 Lacroix. 7 And Bouwman was removed as the Incident 8 Commander for the West Ipperwash beach area and 9 Ipperwash, generally speaking, even though it was 10 Bouwman's area as a Detachment Commander, and then 11 sometime after that, Carson became overall Incident 12 Commander of this. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: In respect of the role of Lacroix, 17 though -- 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: -- this is what I'm trying to -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- you remember you said the -- 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: -- role of Lacroix and I said I don't 24 want to talk about that because -- 25 A: Yeah, no, I appreciate that --


1 Q: -- that's -- you said that it was 2 viewed that Lacroix should take over from Bouwman. Did 3 you misspeak yourself when you just said that? 4 Because isn't it April 20th, '95 has 5 Bouwman taking over from Lacroix? 6 A: Well -- 7 Q: Unless -- and you may not have 8 misspoke yourself then, just explain, because I'm 9 confused. 10 A: Well, that's why I said, just give me 11 a moment to look at the dates. 12 Q: Please do. 13 A: I'm certain, sir, and I'm sure 14 Lacroix's going to show up here one day, but I'm certain 15 that it went from Bouwman to Lacroix to Carson. 16 So I don't know if there's a problem with 17 these dates, but I know that's what I -- that that's at 18 odds with the dates on these memos. But I'm absolutely 19 certain that's how the management of this situation took 20 place. 21 It was first Bouwman, and then Lacroix, 22 and then Carson became involved. And when Carson became 23 involved Bouwman kind of came back into the picture for a 24 bit. So, perhaps -- I don't know if Carson is back by 25 this time and Bouwman is now involved, I mean there was -


1 - there was that kind of flexing going on, movement 2 between Staff Sergeants at that particular time. 3 I don't know -- 4 MR. COMMISSIONER: I note in the Bouwman 5 memo it says that he's incident commander for routine 6 occurrences. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Right. But -- but 8 it's also apparent, I would suggest to you, Mr. 9 Commissioner, though, it's more a matter of argument than 10 anything else. It's apparent from the wording that if 11 there's something non-routine, an inspector will be 12 brought in. 13 MR. COMMISSIONER: Yes. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It certainly 15 doesn't look like they're contemplating a role for 16 Inspector Carson at that point, in other words, that 17 anybody has been designated. 18 MR. COMMISSIONER: And this is April of 19 '95? 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: April 20th, '95. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 23 Q: You've been as helpful as you can on 24 this and I think we can move on. 25 A: And I think, sir, to be quite honest


1 with you, because -- because Staff Sergeant Bouwman 2 writes this memo and says this is the way it is, is not 3 necessarily -- may not necessarily be accurate. 4 Q: Fair enough. And we could say the 5 same for the May 30th, 1994 addendum by -- 6 A: Lacroix? 7 Q: -- Lacroix? 8 A: No, I have much more confidence in 9 Lacroix's memo being accurate. 10 Q: All right. Now, let's move to 11 September 1995. 12 A: Okay. 13 Q: And I'll leave the awkwardness 14 between you and Bouwman to you. Let's leave -- go to 15 September 1995 and address the question of the role of 16 Lacroix. 17 Is there any chance that Lacroix thought 18 he was in the Incident Commander in September 1995? 19 A: No. 20 Q: No, okay. And I don't say it because 21 there's evidence of that, I say it because we have these 22 different incident commanders. 23 A: I understand how it's confusing, 24 sure. 25 Q: Fine. And it's fair to say, in fact,


1 that it is quite deliberate in the sense that Carson is 2 brought in to deal with this and Lacroix is left at 3 Petrolia to do what he does? 4 A: Right -- 5 Q: Okay. 6 A: -- I agree. 7 Q: And Lacroix does get involved, he 8 gets involved on September 6, 1995 in a narrow, specific 9 role, correct? 10 A: Agreed. 11 Q: And the narrow, specific role is to 12 lead a CMU team because he happens to be a staff sergeant 13 with that training? 14 A: Right. 15 Q: And not for any other purpose? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Okay. Now, going back a step, would 18 you agree with me that in terms of the players in this 19 piece, and I apologize for the colloquials -- 20 A: No problem. 21 Q: -- the people involved in this 22 process, among others, are you -- really the one who has 23 the continuity, because when you look at May '94, April 24 '95, it looks like the only name that keeps coming up is 25 Mark Wright, consistently, as somebody in charge.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: You have the continuity, then there 3 is Korosec who runs ERT. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: September '95 he runs ERT? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: And that means when there are 8 decisions to be made about ERT, he may be able to be 9 countermanded by the incident commander, but he is the 10 first person to go to on how you use ERT; isn't that 11 right? 12 A: Are we talking about September 5/6, 13 sir? 14 Q: Yes? 15 A: Just for the movement of those 16 officers on those checkpoints and that kind of stuff, but 17 not major decisions with regards to ERT. 18 Q: And that's why I say it can be 19 countermanded, but he is a man that you go through to 20 move ERT around? 21 A: Yeah, sure. 22 Q: He's the manager of ERT? 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: John Carson can't be manager to 25 everybody --


1 A: Agreed -- 2 Q: -- everybody gets a job? 3 A: Right. 4 Q: Stanley Korsec's job -- could you 5 give me what ERT stands for again because I'm going to 6 mess it up? 7 A: It's Emergency Response Team. 8 Q: Stan Korosec's job is to run the 9 Emergency Response Team in accordance with the directions 10 he receives from the incident commander? 11 A: That's fair, sure. 12 Q: Okay. And Lacroix's job is far more 13 narrow, as we've already discussed, correct? 14 A: Right. 15 Q: Okay. Now, I want to go over a 16 chronology with you. 17 A: It's even narrower than that if I can 18 help you, sir -- 19 Q: Sure -- 20 A: -- because to my understanding there 21 were -- you had to have a staff sergeant trained to -- 22 for CMU. And I think there were only two staff sergeants 23 that were trained and one was quite a bit farther away, 24 and he's right next door. 25 Q: Right.


1 A: So it was a matter of he would -- and 2 apparently that, I learn now, that that was his first day 3 back from annual leave. I mean it was -- he had the job 4 specs and he happened to be the closest guy. 5 Q: Fair enough. Now, I want to -- I 6 apologize Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Millar is going to help 7 me on what time I started so I can... 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You started 9 at 1:40. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Boy, time flies. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. It's 12 just under an hour. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 16 Q: I have the statement of Wade Lacroix 17 to SIU dated September 8th, 1995. And based on my review 18 of the records, that is, I could be wrong, but I don't 19 believe he gives a statement about the incident before 20 September 8th, 1995 at 6:45 p.m., to my knowledge. 21 Now, if I'm wrong, you'll correct me or 22 Counsel will correct me, but I believe that's when he 23 gives his statement. 24 If -- I'm just going to -- you were given 25 notice and Counsel were given notice on this document.


1 We're going to hand up a copy for the Commissioner, a 2 copy for the witness. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 7 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: Would you agree with me that as the 13 individual who -- whose direct role was the leading of 14 the crowd management unit, in respect to the occupiers 15 marching down the road, he ultimately was in charge of 16 between fifty (50) to sixty (60) police officers? 17 Would you agree with that? When you add 18 up ERT -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- TRU, K-9, we get around fifty- 21 eight (58) officers, it's actually in the statement -- 22 A: Is that what it is? 23 Q: Yeah. 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: But I just -- is that about


1 consistent with what you remember? 2 A: Yeah. But he wouldn't be running the 3 TRU team, though. 4 Q: Oh, okay. 5 A: You know, that -- 6 Q: But he would march with, for 7 example -- 8 A: The CMU. 9 Q: Right. 10 A: He would be in charge of that -- 11 however many officers made up that -- however many ERT 12 officers made up that CMU unit and the -- the arrest 13 teams and the K-9, all those individuals that marched 14 down that road -- 15 Q: Hmm hmm. 16 A: -- they would fall under Lacroix. 17 That TRU team that flanked the CMU, that's why Carson was 18 down there at the TOC -- 19 Q: Fair enough. 20 A: I'm not an incident commander, sir, I 21 haven't had that, but that's my understanding, that if 22 you deploy TRU you have to have a commissioned officer 23 running the show, and that's why Inspector Carson was 24 down there. 25 Q: But Carson wouldn't have been leading


1 the troops down the road, that would be Lacroix? 2 A: Right. But you're talking about -- 3 you were suggesting and -- 4 Q: Oh, I hear your -- 5 A: That -- that -- 6 Q: Your clarification is very fair. 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: If you turn to page 5... 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: He -- he finishes describing his 13 briefing. He says, at the top of page 5, and this is an 14 interview that's conducted by actually two (2) 15 individuals; Trevor Richardson, a detective sergeant with 16 the OPP and a Mr. Kennedy, investigator Kennedy, from SIU 17 which you'll see reflected in the statement -- 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: -- as we go. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: And the idea of that, of course, is 22 that there is parallel investigations going on, right? 23 A: Right. 24 Q: At the top of page 5, or I apologize, 25 third line down:


1 "So that was pretty much my briefing." 2 So he's described his briefing; I'll go 3 back to that. But -- 4 A: Right. 5 Q: "I checked out the squad which was I 6 wanted to make sure there was enough 7 personnel, minimum of twenty-four (24) 8 and I had, I believe, thirty (30). The 9 first three (3) ranks were supposed to 10 be eight (8) and I had three (3) ranks 11 of eight (8). Reversal squad can be 12 somewhat lighter; it's an arrest squad 13 and there was six (6). And I was given 14 two (2) K-9 in support, which is the 15 training. 16 I had John Melnyck (phonetic) from 1 17 and Woody from Number 2 District in 18 support. 19 There's a technique they use in case 20 there's a problem. I can use the K-9 21 to back people up. I was told that 22 London TRU would also be in support of 23 our endeavour." 24 So you see that he's referring to arrest 25 squad of approximately six (6) officers with two (2) K-9


1 in support, which would be two (2) officers, right? 2 A: Right. 3 Q: So that's eight (8) officers plus 4 twenty-four (24), which is thirty-two (32) -- I'm sorry, 5 it's eight (8) -- yeah, eight (8) plus twenty-four (24) 6 which is thirty-two (32); is that right? 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: So he has thirty-two (32) officers 9 under his charge, right? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: And then I do want to point out to 12 you, very quickly, at page 7, when we're talking numbers, 13 he actually says, nine (9) lines down at page 7: 14 "We proceeded there and when I got 15 there I asked for an additional arrest 16 squad to be in support, which Number 1 17 District was turned over to me." 18 A: Right. 19 Q: So he actually gets some more. 20 A: Right. 21 Q: So we're at thirty-two (32) and 22 likely we're at thirty-four (34). 23 A: Plus whatever, right? 24 Q: Or more. 25 A: Right.


1 Q: Right? At least thirty-four (34) 2 individuals; is that fair? 3 A: Yeah. I'd say that's fair. 4 Q: All right. And then there's the 5 thirty-four (34) individuals that Wade Lacroix directly 6 leads, yes? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: He -- and in the course of the 9 incident, you heard over the radio, he tells them how to 10 flank, how -- what formations to -- to adopt in respect 11 of a fear of gunfire, right? 12 A: Right, yeah. 13 Q: That turns out to be not -- not real, 14 right? 15 A: Right. 16 Q: And then he tells the split flank and 17 the punch out and he does all these things with these -- 18 A: Right. 19 Q: -- thirty-four (34) -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: people. Different people do 22 different things. 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: And it's all Wade Lacroix who does 25 all that?


1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: All right. And your -- your point to 3 me before about Carson is that Carson gives the overall 4 direction on what the objective is and what you don't do. 5 For example, you don't follow them into the Park? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: Right. But it is Wade Lacroix's 8 responsibility to take those thirty-four (34) officers, 9 armed officers, right, and to go and have them march in 10 the formations that he thinks are appropriate to respond 11 to the incidents he thinks are appropriate; that's all 12 Wade Lacroix? 13 A: Yeah, I would agree with you -- 14 Q: Right. 15 A: -- yeah. Now -- now, I guess he's -- 16 this is being intimately supervised by Carson because 17 he's at the TOC -- 18 Q: Right. 19 A: -- and he hears everything so I mean 20 if Carson -- I suspect if Lacroix was doing something 21 that Carson didn't want, Lacroix would hear about it 22 immediately, because that was what's -- 23 Q: He'd -- he'd hear about it but, to be 24 fair, in the middle of an incident, if Lacroix is 25 entrusted to -- to move the thirty-four (34) men and


1 women -- 2 A: Right. 3 Q: -- and dogs against the occupiers in 4 a fashion that in his good judgment, there's not a lot 5 you can do about it from back at TOC, until minutes 6 later. He's marshalling -- 7 A: No, it would be -- it would be -- 8 Q: -- and moving the thirty-four (34) 9 people. 10 A: It would be instantaneous because the 11 TOC is -- well, I'm sure you've been down there at the 12 parking lot, and it's not very far, and my recollection 13 of what happened was Skinner, the TRU Team Staff 14 Sergeant, was sitting beside Carson and they had Comm so 15 if -- if Carson -- Lacroix was going to do something then 16 -- and Carson had a problem with it he could 17 instantaneously tell Lacroix not to. But certainly there 18 would be a lag time. 19 Q: Right. Now, I want to continue on 20 the Lacroix statement. I apologize, Mr. Commissioner, 21 it's going to take us some time. I'm not going to spend 22 heavy time and a lot of documents. This is one that -- 23 that I -- I do want to ask you about. 24 So Lacroix at page 1 says: 25 "Okay. It was the 6th of September,


1 1995, Wednesday evening." 2 And I just want to point to you, sir, that 3 Richardson says to him: 4 "This is going to be your duty report 5 and you can start at any time Wade." 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Where are 7 you reading from now? 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The two (2) lines 9 right above where I read, and I apologize, Mr. 10 Commissioner. So on page 1, under the name "Richardson" 11 where it appears, the last two (2) lines of that 12 paragraph says: 13 "This is going to be your duty report and 14 you can start at any time Wade." 15 THE WITNESS: Right. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Page 1, Mr. 17 Commissioner of the Lacroix statement. 18 And then you see the name "Richardson." 19 If you go down you see: 20 "LACROIX: No, I do not mind. 21 RICHARDSON: Also present is SIU 22 investigator Jim Kennedy." 23 Do you see that? It's page 1. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I do. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. And


1 then in that paragraph where he says, Also present is SIU 2 investigator: 3 "This is going to be your duty report and 4 you can start at any time Wade." 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 8 Q: Now a duty report means that 9 basically this is Wade Lacroix's account of what went 10 down, right? 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: And it's not only an account to SIU, 13 it's the official internal OPP account? 14 A: Yeah, I'd say they're one (1) and -- 15 they should be one (1) and the same, shouldn't they? 16 Q: They should be, and it makes it 17 better when they're both present sometime but -- 18 A: That's right. 19 Q: -- let's leave that aside. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: I'm simply pointing out to you that 22 prior to this, and I can't find any record of it, Wade 23 Lacroix isn't accounting for his conduct in any formal 24 fashion, any debriefing fashion; do you know of? 25 A: I don't know --


1 Q: Is Wade Lacroix being debriefed by 2 you between September 6th and September 8th? 3 A: No, I have a quick conversation with 4 him when he comes back from the incident. It's very 5 quick and I've given some evidence and -- 6 Q: Yes, but he doesn't debrief you? 7 A: No. 8 Q: No. And you don't know of a formal 9 debriefing that he had prior to this? 10 A: Agreed. I do not know -- 11 Q: And that's why they call it his duty 12 report? 13 A: Yeah. I don't know why -- why Trevor 14 called it a duty report but -- 15 Q: Well -- 16 A: -- in any event, that's what he did. 17 Q: -- it says -- it says duty to report. 18 A: Yeah, well, sure. 19 Q: Okay? So he does that. It says: 20 "6th of September, '95 Wednesday 21 evening. I completed my regular tour 22 of duty at 4:30 p.m. I was home with 23 my family when I received a phone call 24 from Sergeant Stan Korosec, the Number 25 1 District ERT Team Leader and the


1 Command Post at the Forest Detachment. 2 He advised me that there had been a 3 further escalation of the situation at 4 the Ipperwash Provincial Park involving 5 a civilian motorist; that at sometime 6 during the day I took it that there had 7 been, um, the demonstrators had 8 actually taken up a position in the 9 public -- I call it the public access 10 parking lot which is actually outside 11 the Provincial Park. I know where it 12 is, there's a bend in the road, Army 13 Camp Road there. They had taken up a 14 position there at the curve and there 15 had been some involvement the night 16 before involving the checkpoint 17 personnel with rock throwing, clubs and 18 now tonight, Monday, this is the night 19 of Wednesday, it had escalated to a 20 civilian motorist having his vehicle 21 pelted with rocks and hit with baseball 22 bats. That day we were forming two 23 (2) ERT teams, number 3 and number 6 24 into a CMU, a Crowd Management Unit and 25 required a trained unit commander to be


1 on standby with them at the Command 2 Post. I was called, but recalled to 3 duty, and at that I believe it was 4 Lynton who was really calling me out as 5 the on duty commander." 6 See that? 7 A: Yeah. 8 Q: Does that accord with your memory? 9 A: Well, I'm a little confused with the 10 -- that day we were forming two ERT teams, number three 11 and six, into a CMU. I think he's talking about that's 12 what happened. 13 Q: Yeah, I agree. 14 A: Not that -- you know, that day 15 somebody decided we were going to have a CMU team sitting 16 at forest detachment. 17 Q: I think that's fair -- 18 A: I think that's what he means. 19 Q: -- we'll hear from Mr. Lacroix, but, 20 I think that's what I took from it. I'm not going to ask 21 you about it in that sense -- 22 A: Okay -- well that's the -- 23 Q: That's a fair point though. 24 A: Okay, so -- 25 Q: At the bottom:


1 "I changed into tactical clothing, went 2 to the Detachment, picked up a sidearm, 3 baton, helmet, all of my hard tack". 4 Now, that's what you'd expect him to do; 5 am I right? 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: He knows that he's going to be the 8 leader of CMU -- 9 A: Right -- 10 Q: -- and that he's going to need all 11 this riot gear to go do his job? 12 A: Yeah, I don't know -- my recollection 13 of this, sir, is I was talking to Lynton and my 14 recollection is the inspector wasn't aware that CMU 15 needed a trained staff sergeant. And I've given that in 16 my evidence in-Chief and I said, Well if that's what 17 you're contemplating we better call a guy in and the guy 18 that I know whose got that training is Lacroix and he's 19 down the road, and Stan makes the call. 20 So I don't know so much that they had 21 decided or it had been decided to use CMU, but, you know 22 if we were going to do this we better have the guy who is 23 going to have to walk down the road with them there. So 24 it was -- I don't think Wade knew for sure whether or not 25 he was going to be used yet.


1 I mean by the time he got there I think it 2 was pretty -- I think that decision had been made. I'm 3 just trying to be accurate. 4 Q: Sure. No, no, that's very fair. I - 5 - I would just back you up and ask you, when he says: 6 "He advised me there had been a further 7 escalation." 8 A: Right. 9 Q: And this is at page 1 and I'm quoting 10 Staff Sergeant Lacroix. 11 A: Right. 12 Q: Now he is a staff sergeant at the 13 time? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: All right. He's indicating that he's 16 being called out because of an escalation; would you 17 agree? 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: And he's also indicating that the 20 person who called him out was the manager of ERT, 21 Korosec, right? 22 A: Right. 23 Q: He's also indicating what portions of 24 ERT formed the CMU, right? 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: And what he's not doing is saying, 2 Just in case? 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes, he does. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 6 Q: Do you see that? 7 A: Do I see what? 8 Q: Let me back up. So far when he 9 refers to ERT and he refers to his role in view of an 10 escalation, he doesn't say just in case. -- 11 A: Right. 12 Q: Now as Mr. Millar brought to my 13 attention, further down the page, to be fair to you, 14 there's a reference to "stand by," correct? 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: I'm just telling you that's my 18 recollection of how he got called out. I don't think 19 that decision had been made unless Linton told Korosec 20 something else that I'm not aware of, but -- 21 Q: And just so I understand something, 22 Linton had made a decision -- had made a decision to call 23 out Lacroix to head up CMU. He had made a decision, he 24 hadn't waffled, he actually made a decision? 25 A: No, I guess I disagree with you. He


1 was thinking about CMU and I told him, Well if you're -- 2 if you're going to use that as an option you need a staff 3 sergeant, and Lacroix is the guy. So he said to Korosec 4 to call him. 5 So I guess he -- I mean he needed, in 6 order to do that he was going to have that guy there. 7 I'm not trying to be argumentative, sir, I'm just trying 8 to be as clear as I can be about that. 9 Q: Now, Korosec talks to Lacroix on the 10 phone, yes? 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: And it's obvious the information 13 that's been passed onto Lacroix because he, in detailed 14 fashion, conveys it to the investigators, yes? 15 A: Right. 16 Q: Do you see any references to those 17 litany of things that Mr. Sandler played for you? You 18 know how he did all those nice tapes after 9:00 p.m. at 19 night, do you see any reference to any of those things? 20 A: I do not see it in here, no. 21 Q: Not -- nothing. Now, interestingly 22 enough, of course, that would have been a stretch for 23 Lacroix because 90 percent of what Mr. Sandler played for 24 you happened after 9:00 p.m., and of course what Korosec 25 is saying to Lacroix is before 9:00 p.m.


1 A: Well that's -- and that -- the point 2 I was making, sir, frankly, was that, yeah, I don't think 3 the call had been made for CMU yet. 4 It was, if you're going to do that, you're 5 going to need a staff and I was concerned about time 6 clicking away and it getting darker, and let's get the -- 7 if that's what you need, you got to have a staff here. 8 Q: And you testified in answer to Mr. 9 Sandler's questions, he referred you to a portion of -- 10 of the evidence that you gave Mr. Millar -- that's very 11 complicated and convoluted, so let me start over again. 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: Mr. Sandler asked you: Isn't it true 14 that your basic evidence to Mr. Millar is that CMU was 15 deployed at 20:46, and you agreed that that was correct. 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: Is that true? 18 A: Yes, something around the -- when 19 he's -- yeah, I think. 20 Q: The decision was made to deploy CMU 21 at 20:46? 22 A: That's -- that's -- somebody asked me 23 what I thought -- when that happened, and based on the 24 scribe notes, that was the -- that was the answer I gave, 25 based on what I read in there.


1 I don't have an independent recollection 2 of that, but viewing the scribe notes as I recall, that's 3 what my best guess was. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Now, so I understand how the process 8 works, I want to go over what Lacroix says how he got 9 briefed, because you testified to Mr. Millar, and I'm 10 going to suggest that it wasn't so much that you got it 11 wrong, as you omitted some things. 12 A: Okay. 13 Q: You told Mr. Millar that Lacroix was 14 briefed by Carson. You did say you were present. I want 15 to read you what Lacroix says. 16 "I changed into tactical clothing [I'm 17 at the bottom of page 2]. I changed 18 into tactical clothing, went to the 19 Detachment, picked up sidearm, baton, 20 helmet, all of my hard tack, what we 21 call hard tack equipment; proceeded to 22 Forest Detachment and arrived at about 23 9:30 where I was briefed by Sergeant 24 Korosec while I was dressing." 25 You see that?


1 "The CMU crime management unit was 2 already formed up, formation behind the 3 Detachment for roll call. They were 4 undergoing roll call by Sergeant 5 Hebblethwaite and they were equipping 6 themselves. 7 I was briefed by Sergeant Korosec, then 8 Staff Sergeant Mark Wright, acting 9 Detective Sergeant Wright, as the 10 events since Monday." 11 See that? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: Is -- is Mr. Lacroix mistaken or is - 14 - is -- 15 A: No, I recall having some conversation 16 with him, yeah. 17 Q: And you'd agree with me, and by the 18 way, for the purposes of the record, the reference to the 19 timeframe in which the decision was made to deploy CMU, 20 the reference is page 182, March 6th, 2006, line 19 21 through line 2 at page 183. 22 But you'd agree then that what's really 23 happening here is a practical matter, is a practical 24 matter, is that Lacroix's flying in, right, to do the 25 job?


1 A: Right. 2 Q: And he's flying in and Korosec sits 3 him down as he's changing. 4 A: Looks that way, yeah. 5 Q: Yeah. And you remember how you 6 testified you were pretty close with Korosec, about to be 7 -- to be like close proximity, person-to-person? 8 Now, to be fair to you, you were talking 9 about in the trailer, I think -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- in-chief, but I -- I do want -- 12 you probably would have been there? 13 A: I don't think so. I think Lacroix is 14 doing that in the garage. I just -- I don't think -- 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: -- he'd be kitting up in the command 17 -- in the trailer. 18 Q: Okay. He's briefed by Korosec then 19 by you. 20 A: Yes. Either I went out or he came 21 in. I remember Wade in the Command Post prior to, and I 22 spoke to him very briefly, and then he went out -- he was 23 having conversation with Inspector Carson in the command 24 post and I remember having a very quick conversation with 25 him and then he went out with Inspector Carson, because


1 the CMU was lined up behind the Detachment and I went 2 back there and I'm sure Korosec was back there. 3 And I can't remember where Inspector 4 Linton is at this time. 5 Q: So I take it your evidence is while 6 you don't have a specific memory, it's either possible 7 that Korosec was alone in the locker area with Lacroix, 8 or you might have been there and then saw him later, too; 9 you're just not sure? 10 A: No, I'm -- I'm -- I wouldn't have 11 been -- I was -- my -- I never -- I don't recall ever 12 speaking to him in the garage area. 13 Q: All right. 14 A: I just recall speaking to him in the 15 command trailer. 16 Q: When you next spoke to him, Korosec 17 would have been there? 18 A: I -- 19 Q: Remember how you said you were close 20 and -- 21 A: Yeah, I don't know. He -- because 22 CMU -- the guys were kitting up, right and he might have 23 been at the back -- in the back yard with him. I don't 24 recall Stan there when I spoke to Wade, quickly. 25 Q: You were described as briefing Wade


1 not just speaking to him. 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: He said you briefed him. 4 A: I know, I see that, yeah. 5 Q: And would you agree with me that the 6 point of a briefing in this -- you're all trying to do 7 your job right? 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: And the point of a briefing, 10 especially among senior officers -- I mean we're talking 11 about on the one (1) hand you -- folks called him Waddie 12 or call him Waddie, right; that's his nickname? 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: We see that in the tape transcript -- 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: -- his nickname. So Staff Sergeant 17 Lacroix or Waddie, on the one (1) hand Waddie -- 18 A: Well, his first name's Wade so -- 19 Q: Right. No, I understand, so his 20 nickname's Waddie? 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: Yours is Popcorn. 23 A: Among others. 24 Q: And -- and it may not surprise you to 25 know that I have a few nicknames that I --


1 A: I think we all do. 2 Q: And it -- in terms of the situation 3 here we have -- Waddie's about to basically lead a group 4 of thirty-four (34) officers and two (2) dogs right? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: Korosec -- well, he's in charge of 7 ERT right? 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: Right. And you, you're -- you're the 10 one that's been moving around. You met with the 11 cottagers at 6:00 p.m. You saw the -- the people with 12 the sticks and the bats thirty (30) feet away in the 13 sandy parking lot and then you -- you heard things on the 14 radio and then so -- so the three (3) of you were trying 15 to get on the same footing as to what information you 16 have. 17 You're trying to bring this man up to 18 speed; that is Waddie, correct? 19 A: Yeah, and I also was of -- of the 20 impression at that time that because Carson was there at 21 that time that he would have briefed Lacroix as well 22 because I was on the phone with the -- Mr. McCabe. I 23 continually forget that individual's name but I -- I was 24 on the phone with Mr. McCabe too when Carson comes back 25 and Linton and him are talking and I -- and I recall --


1 as I recall Lacroix and Carson have a conversation as 2 well so -- 3 Q: Yes, he says that and we're going to 4 get to it -- 5 A: Okay. 6 Q: -- but he says two (2) days after the 7 incident -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- in a duty report that you briefed 10 him. 11 A: Okay. Yeah, I see that. 12 Q: He's not wrong is he? 13 A: Well, I don't remember exactly what I 14 said to him so... 15 Q: But you don't dispute it? 16 A: No. No. 17 Q: Okay. And you know that part -- it 18 would be in keeping with your function to tell him what 19 you knew? 20 A: Sure, yeah. 21 Q: Okay. 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: And the idea of a briefing though you 24 pointed out you don't have a great memory of it, the idea 25 of a briefing is that one (1) officer shares with another


1 officer that there -- that is being briefed the 2 information, potentially the grounds for police action 3 they have, yes? 4 A: Hmm hmm. 5 Q: I'm not -- it's not only that I'm 6 saying that's one (1) of the jobs of -- 7 A: It may be, yes. 8 Q: Okay. And another job would be to 9 share whatever perceptions or concerns you may have? 10 A: That would be of paramount 11 importance. 12 Q: Right. And then finally it would be 13 to share whatever action the officer whose in authority 14 not to direct the person but to give them their opinion 15 on what's going on and what ought to be done? 16 A: I -- I don't understand that last 17 part, sir. 18 Q: Well, see it's one (1) thing to say - 19 - say here's the information I have -- 20 A: Right. 21 Q: -- and here's the grounds I have for 22 police action. 23 A: Right. 24 Q: Like, whatever action we're going to 25 take here is what I know.


1 A: Right. 2 Q: I -- I always think of the -- the 3 breath test. The arresting officer brings -- 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: -- them in and -- 6 A: Passing it on, sure. 7 Q: This is what I -- couldn't touch his 8 nose. 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: -- had problems walking. He shares 11 his grounds. Then he -- so he shares his information and 12 his grounds. He shares his perceptions but then part of 13 the briefing can be, especially among senior officers, is 14 what they think ought to happen as an opinion; not a 15 direction, as an opinion. 16 You're -- you're a group of officers; 17 Waddie, Korosec in charge of ERT, and you. You're a 18 group of senior officers, neither is running the other 19 correct? 20 A: Neither -- well, Korosec is -- pardon 21 me -- Lacroix is absolutely senior to myself and Stan 22 Korosec. 23 Q: All right. So you -- you wouldn't 24 tell him your opinion of what you think should be done? 25 A: No, I -- I -- my sense is I -- I'm --


1 my sense is that you know he was there, Carson was in 2 charge. 3 Now he was -- John had been there and 4 again I've said that I had, you know -- and John was 5 there, I had overwhelming confidence in him as an 6 Incident Commander and I left that up to him to explain 7 to Lacroix what he wanted done with respect to -- I don't 8 think he needed grounds to -- Lacroix wouldn't 9 necessarily need to know Carson's grounds. 10 I think all Lacroix would need to know is 11 that Carson had made that call, there was a threat to 12 public safety, and that he wanted to move those 13 individuals out of the sandy parking lot and the roadway 14 and back into the parking lot. 15 Now, I -- I think that's really sufficient 16 for Lacroix's purposes to move CMU down the road because 17 the responsibility I don't think shifts to Lacroix I 18 think it remains with Inspector Carson and I think he 19 made that clear to his credit when he was here. 20 Q: Now, two-thirds (2/3's) of the way 21 down page 3: 22 "I come back from vacation on Tuesday 23 morning." He refers to you and Stan 24 Korosec briefing him, you see that? 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: Wade Lacroix two days after this 2 incident says Korosec and you brief him; you see that? 3 A: Yeah I see it, yeah. 4 Q: Yes, I come -- as to the events since 5 Monday. 6 "I come back from vacation on Tuesday 7 morning. I came back from vacation on 8 Tuesday, but, actually Monday night I'd 9 been called at home and told about the 10 incident because they took my entire 11 platoon from Petrolia to go to 12 Ipperwash when it was first occupied. 13 So I'd been briefed on Monday night and 14 was advised to come to the forest on 15 Tuesday morning to be briefed in case I 16 was needed. I had been brought up to 17 speed on Monday nights events of the 18 windshield being broke, or at that time 19 by a baseball bat. I was brought up to 20 speed that some other cruisers had been 21 damaged Tuesday night with baseball 22 bats, rocks. And then this event, 23 rocks, baseball bats, so it fit with me 24 that it was a crowd management team 25 type of situation. Nobody mentioned


1 any firearms or any appearance of 2 firearms." 3 Now, that's of course interesting because 4 it was your evidence that your concern, in part, based on 5 the different pages Mr. Sandler put in front of you, and 6 tapes he says you would have heard, this whole notion of 7 a truck being opened -- 8 A: September 4, yeah. 9 Q: All right. That doesn't get said to 10 Lacroix at that time? 11 A: No, but, you know sir, I think you 12 know, Staff Sergeant Lacroix is -- is forgetting, you 13 know, I mean obviously Carson sent TRU down to the kiosk 14 to check to see if there was somebody in there with a 15 weapon because there was some concern about that. 16 So I mean, Wade knew that that was taking 17 place and he knew -- so for him to say there wasn't any 18 mention of firearms, I think that's an omission on his 19 part. 20 Because I don't know how he could make 21 that comment based on what TRU did with respect to the 22 kiosk at Ipperwash Provincial Park. 23 Q: The kiosk was, somebody moved the 24 blinds, we better make sure nothing is going on in the 25 kiosk. There's no firearms in the kiosk.


1 A: Sir -- 2 Q: Am I right or am I missing something? 3 A: I'm not -- I disagree with you, I 4 think -- 5 Q: Was there firearms in the kiosk? 6 A: No I didn't say that there were 7 firearms. I said there was a concern. If you look at 8 Chris Mart -- 9 Q: About the kiosk -- 10 A: -- if you look at Chris Martin's 11 evidence -- his scribe -- the -- the information, he 12 tells Linton that he's concerned that there might be a 13 sniper in there. 14 And so look Carson is quite concerned 15 about line of sight. And line of sight can only mean one 16 thing. I mean in my opinion, with respect, from the 17 kiosk to the sandy parking lot. And he sends, I think 18 Mr. Rosenthal was talking about it, a sniper team, a TRU 19 team sniper team to see what was going on in that kiosk. 20 So I think clearly there was some concern 21 about a firearm being down there. So for Wade to say 22 there was no mention of firearms, I think he's mistaken. 23 Q: So he says, quote: 24 "Nobody had mentioned any firearms or 25 any appearance of firearms, so I was


1 briefed. 2 A: Right. 3 Q: Inspector Carson was on scene at that 4 time and then he briefed me. He wanted 5 me to take the Crowd Management Unit 6 and to move the demonstrators from the 7 public access parking lot back onto the 8 Ipperwash Provincial Park proper." 9 A: Right. 10 Q: It is apparent from the recollection 11 of Wade Lacroix two (2) days after the incident that he 12 recalls basically a Korosec briefing, a Wright briefing 13 and then -- the term he uses is then, a Carson briefing, 14 correct? 15 A: Yeah, it looks that way, yeah. 16 Q: All right. Now, we've gone over what 17 you do or don't remember about the briefing. I just want 18 to establish one thing with you so we're quite -- so that 19 we're on the same page here. 20 A: Sure. 21 Q: In terms of Stan Korosec and what he 22 told Wade Lacroix, I have some questions for you because 23 I need to understand something. You've said Wade 24 Lacroix was senior to Stan Korosec? 25 A: Senior to both of us.


1 Q: All right. But, it's fair to say 2 that Stan Korosec would be a person, as a person in 3 charge of ERT, that would have a significant role or 4 would have potentially significant information to give 5 to, for example, Lacroix, as the person in charge of ERT? 6 A: Well, I think the mere fact that he's 7 a police officer, not necessarily that he's an ERT. I 8 mean I don't know what extra qualifications that he's 9 running the ERT team to give to Lacroix a briefing, I 10 don't know how that would make him any more qualified. 11 Q: Well, let me back up. Stan is in 12 charge of ERT, right? 13 A: Right. 14 Q: ERT forms the CMU team, right? 15 A: Right. 16 Q: So Stan isn't just another police 17 officer, he's the guy that manages the ERT officers and 18 his ERT officers are about to form a Crowd Management 19 Unit that Lacroix is taking over? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: So his briefing is not just an 22 average officer briefing, it's one manager to another, 23 right? 24 A: Well, I guess but -- 25 Q: Okay --


1 A: -- you're suggesting that because 2 he's an ERT team leader that gives him -- and it doesn't 3 -- I mean -- 4 Q: No, no I hear what you're saying, 5 now. Thank you. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: I want to ask you about some 10 information that Mr. Korosec reflects on a tape of his 11 conversation with another officer and I want to find out 12 from you whether it's consistent with what you heard 13 yourself Korosec saying, all right? 14 A: Sure. 15 Q: Mr. Millar's going to play the tape. 16 A: Do we have a transcript or -- 17 Q: Transcript dated September 5th, 1995, 18 region 2 and it occurs at 23:32. 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Just for the purposes 20 of housekeeping, I don't know if My Friend was going to 21 mark the Wade Lacroix statement, but if he was, it might 22 be appropriate to do it now, before we move to another 23 document. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right, 25 we'll do that now, but what about that -- the tape that


1 you're going to play now. Do we have a transcript of it? 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yeah. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're going 5 to give it to us? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm about to 9 produce the transcript -- 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, actually, you 11 have in front of you, Commissioner, a yellow binder, a 12 yellow folder that says "ALST" on it. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That we created and 15 the -- Inspector Wright has one as well and if you look, 16 the second document will say "region 2". 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It sounds as if we 18 have an abundance of copies. 19 THE WITNESS: I have it. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I don't think My 21 Friend heard me when I asked him -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: To make -- 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- if he want to mark 24 the Wade -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- Lacroix statement. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sure 3 he -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I did -- I did hear 5 him. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. We'll 7 make this an exhibit now? 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes, thank you. 9 The next exhibit, please. 10 THE REGISTRAR: P-1153, Your Honour. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1153: Transcript of taped interview 14 of Staff Sgt. Wade Lacroix, 15 September 08, 1995. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 18 Q: This is a -- a conversation between 19 Stan Korosec and Wade Jacklin. Do you know Wade Jacklin? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: Who is he, please? 22 A: He's now a Staff Sergeant in the OPP. 23 Q: Back then? 24 A: Constable. Constable in the OPP. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: All right. I'm going to play the 4 tape for you, and I know that we're supposed to take a 5 break, but I'm going to ask to play both tapes and get 6 the tapes over with, if that's okay. 7 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And then 9 take a break? 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yeah, after we've 11 played both tapes. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Great. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 16 Q: So this is September 5th, 1995, at 17 23:32, command post is speaking and Stan Korosec is 18 speaking to Wade Jacklin. If you could go ahead, please. 19 20 (AUDIOTAPE PLAYED, TRANSCRIPT TO FOLLOW) 21 22 [CP = Command Post] 23 [SK = Stan Korosec] 24 [WJ = Wade Jacklin] 25


1 CP: Command Post, Molly. 2 SK: Hi. Is Bob there? Cousineau? 3 CP: No. Where did Bob go? 4 Unknown: He's out doing a line check. 5 CP: He's out doing a line check. 6 SK: Could I talk to Wade, please? Jacklin. 7 8 CP: Pardon me? 9 SK: Wade Jacklin, please. 10 CP: Wade Jacklin ... 11 SK: He's right beside you. 12 CP: Hold on. 13 WJ: Hello. 14 SK: Wade? 15 WJ: Yes? 16 SK: Stan here. 17 WJ: Stanley. You're not in bed yet? 18 SK: No, I was. I think this is a pager that 19 went off an hour late. Again. 20 WJ: Oh, yeah? 21 SK: 'Cause it says, "Bob Cousineau, Comm. 22 Centre" - or "call me at Command Post." 23 WJ: Oh, really? 24 SK: I think it was probably that conversation 25 we had whenever.


1 WJ: You were sleeping? 2 SK: Yeah. 3 WJ: Oh, isn't that nice. No, he never 4 mentioned anything to me, Stan, at all 5 about, you know, you calling here. 6 SK: I think it was probably before when he 7 asked about the night vision. 8 WJ: Right. 9 SK: When he was talking with me. 10 WJ: We just got the - okay. We just put the 11 night vision out. 12 SK: Okay. 13 WJ: It's the old style that I'm just used to. 14 SK: Yeah. The old I - I Scope. 15 WJ: No, he never - he never paged you in the 16 last little bit. 17 SK: Yeah, he probably paged me before. 18 WJ: Yeah. 19 SK: This fucking thing. I'm going to fucking 20 give McLean Hunter shit tomorrow. 21 WJ: Well, I have your - I have your room. 22 Well, of course ... 23 SK: Well, he ended up calling me. 24 WJ: Hm-mmm. 25 SK: This was - I'll have to give McLean Hunter


1 shit. Okay. We got some rocks thrown at 2 our cruisers? 3 WJ: Yeah. We've got three cars - damaged 4 cruisers. 5 SK: Windows? 6 WJ: Yup. To - there's damage to windshields 7 and they did a little damage to some of 8 the hoods of the cars, too. 9 SK: Little fuckers. 10 WJ: Yeah. The Inspector's in here anyway. 11 SK: Rocks? 12 WJ: He's aware of it. Yeah. I - well, I 13 guess somewhere between a rock and a 14 boulder. A pretty good size I guess. 15 SK: Yeah. Where did this happen? In front of 16 the gate? 17 WJ: No. By the - more towards the main gate 18 of the Provincial Park. 19 SK: Yeah. The main gate. 20 WJ: Oh, that's what you were thinking? Oh, 21 okay. Yup. 22 SK: Okay. Well, did the guys go down there 23 for something? 24 WJ: Well, yeah. There was some stuff they 25 put, you know, on the road I guess. And


1 there was a fire down there. 2 SK: Yeah. 3 WJ: So they went down to check it out and got 4 pelted. 5 SK: Yeah. They were baited. 6 WJ: Yup. 7 SK: Well, live and learn, live and learn. 8 This - their day will fucking come. 9 WJ: Yeah. 10 SK: I was talking to Mark Wright tonight. 11 WJ: Hm-mmm. 12 SK: We want to amass a fucking army. 13 WJ: Hm-mmm. 14 SK: A real fucking army and do this - do these 15 fuckers big time. But I don't want to 16 talk about it because I'll get all hyped 17 up. 18 WJ: And you won't be able to sleep. 19 SK: And I won't be able to sleep. Okay. What 20 time is it? Quarter to twelve. Okay. 21 WJ: Back to bed. 22 SK: Steady up 23 WJ: Okay. 24 SK: Fine. 25 WJ: Have a good night."


1 End of conversation 2 3 (AUDIOTAPE CONCLUDED) 4 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: We're just going to 6 play now the second -- I'm going to ask Mr. Millar to 7 play the second tape so we can be somewhat orderly about 8 this in terms of the break, Mr. Commissioner. 9 And the reason is, is the second tape is 10 so much shorter. It's Region 21, it's dated September 11 6th, 1995 at 20:25 and it's a conversation that Stan 12 Korosec is having with another individual, an operator, 13 in the Pinery meeting centre. 14 But it's the opening of the conversation 15 in which Mr. Korosec makes the statement. And then I'm 16 going to have Mr. Millar, if he doesn't mind, simply stop 17 the tape about halfway down the first page because the 18 rest of the conversation we don't need to play. It's 19 very short. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I will. And I 21 played part of this -- this was partly played -- was 22 played actually, during the evidence of Inspector Carson 23 as well. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, 25 do you have an observation, Ms. Jones?


1 MS. KAREN JONES: Oh, I -- I don't 2 believe that we got notice of this call and I was just 3 wondering if we can get a copy of the transcript. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I have a copy of 5 the transcript and we did actually give notice. But 6 that's okay. There was so much given notice on this 7 so... 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I just gave My 10 Friend another copy of the transcript. The witness has a 11 copy of it and it's the first -- if you could just direct 12 your attention, Inspector Wright, to the first half page. 13 14 (AUDIOTAPE PLAYED, TRANSCRIPT TO FOLLOW) 15 16 EXTRACT - PLAYED - P-1155 17 18 Phone ringing 19 20 [Unidentified speaker: When we were waiting to take his 21 statement from him . inaudible] 22 23 SK: [To someone else: Lacroix is on his way 24 up to do these guys.] 25 OPTR: Operator, Marilyn speaking.


1 SK: Operator, this is Sergeant Stan Korosec 2 with the Ontario Provincial Police at 3 Forest." 4 5 (AUDIOTAPE STOPPED) 6 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: You can stop it. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: Now, did you hear -- 11 A: I heard. 12 Q: -- Inspector Wright, the statement by 13 Stan Korosec at 8:25 p.m. on September 6th, 1995, quote, 14 "Lacroix is on his way up to do these guys," close 15 quotes; did you hear that? 16 A: Yeah, I heard that. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Right. At this 18 point this is an appropriate time to take a break, Mr. 19 Commissioner. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 21 Let's take our afternoon break now. 22 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 23 for fifteen (15) minutes. 24 25 --- Upon recessing at 3:10 p.m.


1 --- Upon resuming at 3:25 p.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 4 resumed. Please be seated. 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: Inspector Wright -- 10 A: Yes, sir. 11 Q: I played the two (2) tapes for you 12 because I wanted to ask you some questions with respect 13 to the experiences you had with Sergeant Korosec leading 14 right up to the briefing of Staff Sergeant Lacroix, okay? 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: You and I discussed the role of a 17 briefing, right? 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: And it's to share perceptions and 20 information that an officer has with the officer being 21 briefed, correct? 22 A: Yeah, I would agree with that. 23 Q: All right. First of all, looking at 24 the first tape I played for you, I'd like to first make 25 it an exhibit, so the record makes some sense as I refer


1 to it. It's the region 2, September 5th, 1995, 23:32. 2 Could we make that transcript the next exhibit please, 3 Mr. Commissioner? 4 THE REGISTRAR: P-1154, Your Honour. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1154. 6 7 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1154: Transcript of Korosec - 8 Jacklin, Track 1, OPP logger 9 tape number 2, Disc 1 of 3, 10 Region 2, Mobile Command 11 Unit, September 05, 1995. 12 23:32 hrs. 13 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Then, just as a 15 matter of completeness, could we make the first page of 16 region 21, September 6th, 1995 at 20:25 hours, P-1155? 17 Now, my suggestion is, frankly, Mr. 18 Commissioner, we make the whole -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The whole 20 tape. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The whole 22 transcript, but if people feel differently, I'm easy. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, I think -- I 24 think we should play the -- make the -- mark the whole 25 transcript, because it will be played.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: But for the purposes 3 of the record we'll just insert in the transcript what 4 was actually played. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 7 THE REGISTRAR: P-1155. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I have 9 1155. 10 11 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1155: Transcript of Stan Korosec, 12 September 06, 1995, 20:25 13 hrs, Mobile Command Unit, OPP 14 logger tape number 04, Track 15 3, Disc 2 of 3, region 21. 16 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. Now 18 dealing with P-1154, you'll see that Stan Korosec is 19 having a discussion with a fellow officer, Mr. Jacklin; 20 is that correct? 21 A: Right. 22 Q: And obviously, with some sympathy to 23 Mr. Korosec, it appears he was woken up by a page; is 24 that right? 25 A: It appears that way, yeah.


1 Q: And I'm just trying to be fair to the 2 context. You're looking at this transcript, we're 3 putting it on the record, let's be fair to the context. 4 A: Yeah, it appears -- 5 Q: It looks like it's late at night, and 6 he's been woken up by a page, and he's not happy with the 7 page maker, McLean Hunter, right? 8 A: I would agree. 9 Q: All right. And I thought that if 10 there's someone out there named McLean Hunter, that's not 11 this page company, we should save them the grief. 12 We're talking about a company that made 13 the page. 14 Now, having said that, there are a couple 15 of comments that I want to ask you about -- 16 A: Sure. 17 Q: -- in terms of your information about 18 Mr. Korosec's information, all right? Complicated, but I 19 want to stay on point. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: First of all, you'll note that by a 22 page and a half of this conversation between Mr. Jacklin 23 and Mr. Korosec, Sergeant Korosec is actually telling 24 Jacklin where they are at, half way down the page. 25 "We just got the -- we just put the


1 night vision out, okay? [and Jacklin] 2 It's the old style that I'm just used 3 to. 4 Yeah, the old eye scope." 5 So they're discussing now night vision 6 wear? 7 A: Yeah, looks that way, yeah. 8 Q: Right. And just so we're clear, 9 while he was woken up, it wasn't night vision wear for 10 Korosec that night, it was for the -- the movement in the 11 Park, right? 12 A: Why he was woken up? 13 Q: No. Why they were talking about 14 night vision wear. 15 A: Yeah, I think -- agree, yeah. 16 Q: Yeah. And then further on Korosec 17 actually reports to -- or, I'm sorry, Jacklin reports to 18 Korosec about damage to the vehicles. 19 Do you see the bottom of page 2 and the 20 top of page 3? 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: Now it's fair to say that Korosec's 23 in charge of ERT. Is there any possibility that 24 Jacklin's a member of ERT? 25 A: I know he was.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: I just can't remember if he was at 3 that time or not. 4 Q: So you could conceivably have a 5 situation, and I'm sure we'll clear it up, of a member of 6 ERT reporting to his senior in charge of ERT? 7 A: Could. 8 Q: All right. Top of page 3: 9 "Yeah, there's damage to windshields 10 and they do damage to some of the hoods 11 of the car." 12 And Korosec says, quote: 13 "Little fuckers." 14 Close quote. 15 Correct? 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: Down the page, page 3, fifth from the 18 bottom: 19 "We'll live and learn. Live and learn. 20 This -- their day will fucking come." 21 Now, looking at the transcript, would you 22 agree with me that, "Their day will fucking come," is in 23 relation to the, quote, "little fuckers," close quotes? 24 A: Yeah, I would agree. 25 Q: And so the head of ERT, on September


1 5th, 1995 -- 2 A: The what, sir? I didn't hear that. 3 Q: The head of ERT. 4 A: Okay. 5 Q: On September 5th, 1995 is projecting 6 to another officer, who may or may not have been part of 7 ERT at the time, to be fair, that he was of the view 8 that, quote: 9 "Their day will fucking come." 10 Right? 11 And he was talking about the occupiers? 12 A: Well, it appears that way, but you'd 13 have to ask him, in all fairness. 14 Q: Right, but you can read? 15 A: I said it appears so, but you would 16 have to ask him to be absolutely sure. 17 Q: Then he says, quote: 18 "I was talking to Mark Wright tonight." 19 A: Right. 20 Q: Jacklin says: 21 "Hmm hmm." 22 Quote: 23 "We want to amass a fucking army." 24 Close quotes. 25 "A real fucking army and do this, do


1 these fuckers big time. But I don't 2 want to talk about it because I'll get 3 all hyped up." 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: He says those things? 6 A: Yeah, appears so, yeah. 7 Q: And the head of ERT is saying on 8 September 5th, 1995, in the late evening hours, that the 9 amassing of, quote, "fucking army," close quotes, is 10 being done in conjunction with you, correct? 11 That's what he's saying? 12 A: I disagree. 13 Q: Well, he's not saying that or you -- 14 A: I disagree -- 15 Q: -- you disagree with him? 16 A: I disa -- 17 Q: He is saying that though? 18 A: No, I disagree. 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: My -- I can tell you that I have 21 absolutely no recollection of ever having that type of a 22 conversation with Korosec, so you're going to have to ask 23 him. But, when I listen to that tape, the guy has 24 obviously just been awoken from a sleep, like you 25 alleged, like you've said, and he says, I was talking to


1 Mark Wright tonight and he stops. And then Jacklin goes 2 "hmm hmm" and then he moves on to, "we want to amass 3 a...," and away he goes. 4 And I don't think -- I mean I don't make 5 the link between, "I was talking to Mark Wright tonight," 6 and then, "we want to amass," and away he goes, because, 7 frankly, sir, I don't ever recall ever having a 8 conversation with him in any regards to that way, shape 9 or form. 10 So you're going to have to ask Sergeant 11 Korosec what he meant by that. But my recollection is 12 that I never had a conversation with him about this. 13 Q: Can we agree on the following? That 14 the words, quote, "I was talking to Mark Wright tonight" 15 close quotes, immediately proceed the words by Korosec, 16 quote, "we want to amass a fucking army," close quotes? 17 A: We can agree with that, yeah. 18 Q: Good. Can we also agree that you and 19 Mark Wright are two members of the -- I'm sorry -- that 20 you and Stan Korosec are two members of the command team? 21 A: Yeah. 22 Q: Can we also agree that Jacklin, for 23 whatever he was, whether he was a member of ERT at the 24 time or simply a subordinate officer, was a subordinate 25 officer to both Korosec and yourself?


1 A: Sure, yeah. 2 Q: And so what you have is a senior 3 officer saying to a subordinate officer, I was talking to 4 another senior officer, Mark Wright. 5 A: Right -- 6 Q: And you'd agree with me that, as 7 senior officers went on Ipperwash Provincial Park on the 8 night of September 5th, 1995, you were a right-hand man 9 to the incident commander, right? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: Everyone knew that? 12 A: Sure. 13 Q: I was talking to the right hand man 14 to the incident commander, We want to amass a fucking 15 army? 16 A: That's not the way -- sir -- you 17 don't -- my evidence is going to continually be the same, 18 regardless of how many times we go over this, is, I heard 19 what he had to say, I've told you what my point is about 20 this. You'll have to ask Sergeant Korosec. 21 I do not recall ever having any 22 conversation with him, in any way, shape or form, in 23 regards to amassing a fucking army. So that's my 24 evidence and -- 25 Q: Fair enough, I've got it.


1 A: -- that's that. 2 Q: And -- and the only part I was asking 3 about was your statement to me, that the two are not 4 necessary linked. The reference to you and the reference 5 to amassing a fucking army. 6 But you're simply speculating because you 7 actually don't have a memory of discussing this with him 8 at all? 9 A: No, I'm not saying -- there is -- I'm 10 satisfied I never had that conversation with him. 11 Q: Fair enough. 12 A: Okay. 13 Q: Now, I want to move to what I'm most 14 interested in, is Stan Korosec briefs Wade Lacroix, the 15 head -- 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: -- of the CMU team. 18 A: Right. 19 Q: Minutes -- while Wade Lacroix is 20 putting on his gear to lead thirty-four (34) police 21 officers and two (2) dogs along with the TRU teams, while 22 he's putting on his gear -- 23 A: Right. 24 Q: -- Stan Korosec is briefing him? 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: The man that's briefing him the night 2 before refers to quote, "do these fuckers big time;" is 3 that true? 4 A: Is that what -- what, did he say 5 that? 6 Q: Yes? 7 A: Yeah, that's him on the tape. 8 Q: All right. And I want to know, did 9 you hear Korosec at any time brief Lacroix on taking that 10 approach? 11 A: No, and he wouldn't. 12 Q: He wouldn't? 13 A: No, I know the man. 14 Q: Who do you know? 15 A: I know Stan Korosec very well. 16 Q: So I take it, it's fair to say, that 17 the man you know is the kind of man who would say, quote: 18 "We want to amass a fucking army --" 19 A: I think -- 20 Q: "-- a real fucking army and do this, 21 do these fuckers big time. But I don't 22 want to talk about it because I'll get 23 all hyped up". 24 You do know him to be that kind of man? 25 A: The -- the Stan Korosec that I know -


1 - that's -- he's up in the middle of the night, he's 2 woken up; you've alleged -- you -- you said that. You 3 know, it's very unfortunate; I'm sure he's going to be 4 embarrassed by that. 5 But he is a very -- he was a very 6 professional police officer; he's no longer with the OPP 7 any longer. And I have -- he -- he -- Stan would do his 8 job to the best of his ability and I appreciate he's 9 expressing a -- an opinion off -- you know, flippant and 10 all those things to a colleague, Wade Jacklin, who's a 11 friend of his. 12 And that's unfortunate but I don't think - 13 - you know, I'm satisfied that Stan would never suggest 14 that to Ja -- Lacroix. He's not that type of an officer. 15 Q: When did you first get notice of 16 Korosec's statements as reflected in the transcript that 17 is now Exhibit P-1154? 18 A: Just before I came here, I think. 19 Q: And when you say, "just before you 20 came here," you mean returned or started your evidence in 21 the first place? 22 A: Before I started my evidence, prior 23 to getting to the Inquiry, whenever that was. A month 24 ago, I think it was. 25 Q: Did you directly or indirectly


1 communicate with Sergeant Korosec about these statements? 2 A: No. 3 Q: Right. And you heard my reference to 4 indirect communication? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: Okay. Now, you talked about the man 7 in the middle of the night, which was 11:25 -- 8 A: The man in the middle of the night. 9 Q: Yeah, you said he was woken up? 10 A: Oh right. Okay, yeah. 11 Q: Right? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: And you talked -- I just -- I need to 14 get something clear. You said, "I know this man." 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: So did you know him to be somebody 17 who would say things like this if you woke him up late at 18 night? You know the man. Not everybody talks about 19 amassing a fucking army, so I want to know -- 20 A: Yeah, I appreciate -- I appreciate 21 that. 22 Q: Right. So I want to know, this man 23 in charge of ERT, was he someone you knew and was he the 24 kind of man, when woken up, would talk like this? 25 A: Well, I know -- he was woken up and


1 he did speak like that, so I guess it goes without saying 2 that he did; didn't he? 3 Q: Well, I -- I -- 4 A: I mean, I don't know how to -- 5 Q: I'm impressed by your mastery of the 6 English language, I really am. Let's back up. What I'm 7 asking you is: Prior to reading this tape, did you know 8 him to be that kind of man? 9 A: I had never given it any thought, 10 sir, why would I? 11 Q: And so the answer to my question is: 12 Since you never gave it any thought, you never knew him 13 to be like this? 14 A: Okay. Sure. Yeah. 15 Q: Yeah. 16 A: I agree with that. I agree with 17 that. 18 Q: And so it came as a surprise to you 19 that he -- 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: -- would talk like this? 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: Yeah? So when you tell me he's not 24 the kind of man to do A, B or C, it's in the context of 25 you never knowing him to be the kind of man that would


1 utter these statements about amassing a fucking army, 2 right? 3 A: You've -- 4 Q: I mean, he's not -- 5 A: You've lost me. 6 Q: You told us, just now, and really as 7 a major crime investigator I ask you to think back to all 8 those bail hearings, where everybody says I know someone 9 to be wonderful and then the Crown says, You know them to 10 be wonderful, did you know they committed these crimes -- 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: -- and the person sitting on the 13 stand goes, No. Well, then, how well do you know them? 14 You know that line of questioning. 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: You've seen it a million times in 17 bail hearings? 18 A: Right. 19 Q: Well now I'm asking you about 20 Korosec. You said you knew him very well but you didn't 21 know that he was the kind of person to utter these kinds 22 of things? 23 A: Well I think it was an indiscretion 24 on his part, yes. 25 Q: That came as a surprise to you?


1 A: Sure. Yeah. Sure. 2 Q: Yeah. So the person you knew isn't 3 the person you would have thought would have said these 4 things? 5 A: I really hadn't given it that much 6 thought, sir, you know. 7 Q: Thank you. Tab -- the next is 8 Exhibit P-1155. Now, Stan Korosec isn't sleeping at 9 Command Post, is he, September 6, 20:25? 10 A: No. No. 11 Q: He says, according to the tape, 12 quote: 13 "Lacroix is on his way up to do these 14 guys." 15 Close quotes. 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: That's kind of interesting because if 18 you look back at 1154, do you see how it says: 19 "Do these fuckers big time." 20 Do you see that? 21 A: 1154 you -- 22 Q: I'm sorry, Exhibit P-1154, it was the 23 previous transcript. If you look at page -- 24 A: Oh, okay. This one. Yeah. 25 Q: -- 4. You see the language quote:


1 "Do these fuckers big time." 2 Close quotes. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I may have a 4 different -- 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I apologize. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't have 7 that on this transcript. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's the previous 9 transcript. It's my fault, I'm bouncing between -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1154 11 transcript I have. But I -- I take it that you're 12 referring now to the 1155? 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Starting -- and 14 it's my fault, so I'll just take one quick step back. I 15 apologize. 16 When I brought to the witness' attention 17 P-1155, it says: 18 "SK." 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: To someone else -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, I see. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: "Lacroix is on his 23 way up to do these guys?" 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. 25 Okay. Okay. Now, I --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Then I had the 2 witness move, it's my fault -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. No, it 4 isn't -- 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I'm trying to -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've got it 7 now. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: You see that, "to do these guys," Mr. 11 Wright? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: And then if you -- interestingly 14 enough, if you look at 1154, which it's an exhibit 15 reference and I should stop saying it because it's going 16 to confuse everybody. If you look at the transcript of 17 the previous night when he was woken up he refers to, "go 18 and do these fuckers big time," last page, page 4. 19 A: Yeah, it's the 23:32 one right? 20 Q: That's right. 21 A: Right. 22 Q: Page 4. 23 A: Okay. Got it. I'm with you. 24 Q: So we've got a proposal by the head 25 of ERT that a real fucking army do this -- do these


1 fuckers big time and then the next day when we all know 2 he's not being woken up this time he's talking about 3 Lacroix is on his way up to do these guys, isn't he? 4 A: That's the words, the language he 5 used, yes. 6 Q: Yes, so that language, "doing" the 7 occupiers, how does that fit within the multi-cultural 8 sensitivities that the OPP is attempting to espouse 9 through the promise, through the Police Services Act -- 10 A: The problem -- 11 Q: -- how does it fit -- 12 A: Sir, the prom -- 13 Q: -- "doing these guys?" 14 A: The promise is not in 1995 so let's-- 15 Q: All right. So you're saying -- 16 A: -- deal with this. 17 Q: -- because no promise to -- 18 A: No. 19 Q: -- treat people humanely was made in 20 '95 -- 21 A: No. No, you're -- 22 Q: -- done. 23 A: You know you're -- you're -- 24 Q: Well then let's back up. 25 A: Well, let's -- let's --


1 MR. MARK SANDLER: If I could just -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'll withdraw the 3 question. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's 5 withdrawn the question. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'll withdraw. 7 I'll move on. 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: Excuse me. Before you 9 move on I don't think it's helpful. Long-term these 10 relationships have to be fostered -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 12 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- and that kind of 13 cross-examination is not helpful. My Friend is not -- 14 and if I could just speak -- My Friend can ask questions 15 in a direct way at times and an antagonistic way and an 16 adversarial way. I have some concerns when that kind of 17 question is asked because it doesn't foster the long-term 18 interest of anyone involved with --- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: There's no 20 question about that but it is cross-examination and I'm 21 trying to hold a close line but we have to give a little 22 leeway in cross-examination. But you have to keep in 23 mind that we're all going to leave here some day. 24 Yes, carry on. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you, Mr.


1 Commissioner. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 4 Q: You'd agree with me the notion of 5 doing the occupiers was not what your job was? 6 A: That's an unfortunate use of 7 terminology; I agree with you, sir. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I ask you 9 again to keep in mind also you know again that this is 10 not a criminal trial. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've said 13 that many times and I just hope that you would ask the 14 questions. They're tough questions but just ask them in 15 a manner and a tone that's appropriate to a public 16 inquiry. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 20 Q: And you'd agree with me that the 21 reference you made to getting up -- to being woken up 22 doesn't apply to this second inappropriate reference does 23 it? 24 It doesn't apply, he was not woken up. 25 A: I agree with you. Yeah, I agree. I


1 agree. 2 Q: Now, let me ask you in relation to 3 Exhibit P-1155 did you ever hear Stan Korosec refer to 4 Lacroix being brought in quote, "to do these guys," close 5 quotes? 6 A: No. 7 Q: Did you hear anyone who briefed 8 Lacroix telling him to come in and do these guys? 9 A: No. 10 Q: You've testified that you weren't in 11 the locker with Korosec and Lacroix when they met. You 12 were quite certain of that. Remember saying that a few 13 minutes ago? 14 A: I was -- yeah, I thought they were in 15 the garage and I was in the Command Post; that's what I 16 thought, yeah. 17 Q: Lacroix is dressing, getting his 18 stuff on -- 19 A: Right. 20 Q: -- and the man who talks about 21 Lacroix coming in to do these guys -- 22 A: Hmm hmm. 23 Q: -- that man who made that reference 24 not an hour earlier am I right, it's an hour before the 25 briefing in the garage --


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: -- am I right? 3 A: Yeah. It appears to be, yeah. 4 Q: Yeah. An hour before that briefing 5 he's alone with Lacroix isn't he? 6 A: I don't know, sir, you'd have to ask 7 him -- 8 Q: You're not there? 9 A: I'm not there and I'm not party to 10 this conversation so -- 11 Q: To the extent Lacroix's version in 12 the statement is to be accepted and I'm of course 13 referring to Exhibit P-1153 -- 14 A: Right. 15 Q: -- to the extent his version is to be 16 accepted he says: 17 "I'm briefed by Korosec first, then 18 Wright --" 19 A: Right. 20 Q: "-- then Carson." 21 A: That's -- that -- yeah, agreed. 22 Q: So the man who briefs him when he 23 arrives on the scene is the one who thinks he was brought 24 in to do these guys isn't that right, an hour earlier? 25 A: Well, sure. Korosec used that term.


1 You know you're -- you're -- I -- I guess you're asking 2 me to -- you're cross-examining me on somebody else's 3 statement, fair enough, and I'm telling you that you know 4 Korosec used that statement and apparently so but I know 5 Sergeant Korosec and he would have been -- he would have 6 told Lacroix what he -- what he needed to know with 7 respect to this situation in an unbiased manner and he 8 would have done his job. 9 And he's reflecting -- you know it's -- 10 it's an off-colour remark that he spoke and you'll have 11 to ask him what exactly he meant by that but in any event 12 I don't think you can take a whole lot from that. 13 Q: Now, would you agree with this that 14 Stan Korosec has a point of contact with Lacroix and I 15 say "Lacroix" a phonetically Quebec background. 16 A: As does he. 17 Q: As a contact with Lacroix as I 18 understand it's pronounced, as a first point of contact 19 on that Wednesday night it is Korosec who calls Lacroix 20 at home; would you agree with that? 21 A: I agree. 22 Q: Right. And then he has another first 23 contact with Lacroix in that garage. 24 A: What do you -- could you define 25 "first contact?"


1 Q: Well, sure, because we -- we get a -- 2 a duty report from Lacroix that says, The guy who calls 3 me is Korosec. 4 A: Right. 5 Q: The guy who briefs me, ahead of 6 Wright, ahead of Carson, is Korosec. 7 A: Okay. 8 Q: It's not ideal to have the mind set 9 of doing the guys, and being the guy that briefs Lacroix, 10 is it? That's not -- 11 A: Well, you know what, sir, staff 12 Sergeant Lacroix's statement doesn't say Korosec told me 13 I was to go down there and do those guys -- 14 Q: No. 15 A: So I mean, you're making the leap 16 that because he makes that comment to somebody off the 17 cuff on the radio, that, you know, his mindset is such 18 that he's going to make that comment to Lacroix. 19 And I think that's unfair, knowing Korosec 20 the way I do, and that's a question best asked of him. 21 Q: Sorry could this next transcript -- 22 I'm now going to refer to region 15, September 6th, 1995 23 by -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You have to 25 speak into the mic --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I apologize. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- Mr. 3 Falconer. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm asking for two 5 (2) copies of the transcript that I'm about to refer to, 6 which is another quote of Sergeant Korosec, September 7 6th, 1995, 17:13. 8 I'm not asking for a tape to be played. 9 It's from OPP logger tape number 3, track 3, disc 2 of 3. 10 And I only really have a brief question to 11 you, and it actually refers to you, Sergeant Wright, at 12 the time, now Inspector Wright, and I just want to direct 13 your attention to it. 14 We gave you notice on it, so I take it you 15 -- you know about the document I'm referring to? 16 A: Yes, I do. 17 Q: All right. And you have it in front 18 of you? 19 A: Yes, I do. 20 Q: All right. And what I'd ask is: 21 This is a conversation in which there is a Rob Graham 22 calling Stan Korosec, correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: Who's Rob Graham? 25 A: He's -- he was a sergeant and he was


1 -- he was an ERT sergeant. 2 Q: Would you agree with me that this ERT 3 sergeant has a conversation with Rob Graham that brings 4 you up in the background? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: If you go to page 2, Korosec is 7 briefing Rob Graham on -- Sergeant Graham on how they 8 almost got the batmobile. 9 A: Right. 10 Q: Do you see that? 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: And that's the vehic -- one of the 13 vehicles driven by the occupiers? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: Halfway down the page it says, quote: 16 "It was stuck in the sand on the beach 17 near Port Franks." 18 Do you see that? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: I'm at page 2 of region 15, September 21 6th, 1995 -- 22 A: Yeah, I've got it. 23 Q: -- 17:13. 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: "Graham: Oh, yeah."


1 Then it ascribes to you: 2 "MW to SK [inaudible]." 3 A: Yeah. 4 Q: Do you see that? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: So it's quoting you, but they can't 7 tell what you're saying. 8 A: Right. 9 Q: Then it says: 10 "SK to MW: What's that?" 11 So Korosec is asking you -- 12 A: Something. 13 Q: -- What's that, what are you saying? 14 A: Yeah. 15 Q: And then you are inaudible in 16 answering, and then SK, quote: 17 "He's in the permanent code of silence, 18 so it's okay." Close quotes. 19 And then Graham says: 20 "Who the fuck's that?" 21 And Korosec answers: 22 "Who's that asshole? 23 Mark Wright." 24 Graham answers: 25 "Fuck off, suck my dick.


1 KOROSEC: Suck what 2 [question mark]? [Inaudible]." 3 And then he goes on to recount about the - 4 - the batmobile stuck in the sand. 5 Let me ask you this, sir. You'd agree 6 with me that whatever words are exchanged halfway down 7 page 2, they apparently were exchanged in your presence. 8 A: It appears to be, yes. 9 Q: Thank you. And you'd also agree with 10 me that, among other things, leaving aside the profanity, 11 Sergeant Korosec refers to, quote: 12 "A permanent code of silence, so it's 13 okay." 14 Close quotes. 15 Do you see that? 16 A: I think it was -- I've listened to 17 that tape, sir, and I think it's cone of silence. I 18 think that's incorrect. 19 Q: All right. Well, this is what I'm 20 going to suggest: I'm going to suggest that at a break 21 that we listen to it, and see if we can assist you on 22 your views of that tape. 23 Whether it's, Permanent cone of silence, 24 so it's okay, or Permanent code of silence, would you 25 agree that both imply that someone can be trusted,


1 absolutely, not to disclose certain things? 2 A: No, that's not what they're talking - 3 - that's not what I took them to talk about. 4 Q: I see. Do you recall the 5 conversation? 6 A: No. 7 Q: All right. So tell me, what do you 8 take Stan Korosec as saying, Permanent code of silence, 9 or Permanent cone of silence? 10 A: Well, I take that to mean -- I think 11 there's a -- it's pretty obvious that there's some 12 lighthearted banter going on between the two (2) of them 13 at my expense. 14 And I think Korosec is alluding to that I 15 -- I don't know what they're talking about or I'm out of 16 the loop with respect to the information. 17 And the banter continues, and I don't 18 think anything turns on that whatsoever, in any way, 19 shape or form, other than they're blowing off some steam 20 at my expense, to which I take no offence. 21 Q: And what -- when you say, nothing 22 turns on this, it's in the context of not actually 23 remembering it happening? 24 A: I heard the tape. I heard the way 25 they were talking --


1 Q: Okay, but you don't remember it? 2 A: Well, no, but, it -- what -- nothing 3 -- what turns on what they had to say? 4 Q: Well, let me put an alternative 5 suggestion since you don't remember let me try to refresh 6 your memory, all right? 7 A: Sure go ahead. 8 Q: How about, Mark Wright can be trusted 9 because of the permanent code of silence? 10 A: No, that's -- you know, that's 11 ridiculous. 12 Q: That's ridiculous? 13 A: Again, I think -- I stand to be 14 corrected -- 15 Q: Is that ridiculous? 16 A: Yeah, that's ridiculous. 17 Q: All right. And would you agree with 18 this, that I can find references in the tapes to one 19 officer referring to another officer as brother? That I 20 can take you to different -- 21 A: I call -- you know, sir, we call each 22 other brother and sister as a matter of course. 23 Q: Right. 24 A: Every day -- every -- I would say 25 there doesn't go a day by when I'm speaking to an


1 officer, where I don't refer to them as brother or they 2 don't refer to me. So that's just a term of endearment 3 and it doesn't mean anything more than that. 4 Q: There's a sense of loyalty, yes, 5 amongst those people you refer to as brothers -- 6 A: Sure, sure, absolutely. 7 Q: And you'd agree with me, you're now 8 an inspector, a management officer, that one of the 9 difficulties in any scenario where there is potential 10 misconduct by one officer, that having other officers 11 report on that misconduct is always a challenge given the 12 loyalties among officers, would you agree with that? 13 A: No. 14 Q: All right. And would you agree with 15 me, if I suggest to you that your efforts, your stanch 16 defence of Stan Korosec in the face of references to 17 amassing a fucking army and doing the occupiers, is a 18 perfect example of you abiding by both that loyalty and 19 the code of silence? 20 Do you agree with that? 21 A: Sir, I disagree. Where -- where is 22 the code of silence leap? I don't know where you're 23 coming with that. And I'm telling you, you're asking me 24 to comment on conversations made by Korosec to which I'm 25 not a party of. So, in order, you know I'm doing my part


1 and I'm answering your questions and I'm telling you that 2 I know the type of man that Stan Korosec was and is and 3 the type of police officer he was. 4 And it was unfortunate that he said that. 5 But, he's not that type of an individual. He's a fine 6 man and he was an upstanding police officer. And there 7 are -- frankly, sir, there are a number of police 8 officers who I would not say that about. 9 And I think I've made that quite clear 10 when you know -- you know -- may he rest in peace and it 11 was difficult for me, but, you know I had some problems 12 with Inspector Linton. And I told it the way I saw it 13 and I explained that to you. 14 You know, I'm giving -- I'm giving you the 15 truth and I really take offence to the code of silence. 16 There's no such thing nor would I have anything to do 17 with any code of silence. 18 Q: Could you please direct your 19 attention to Commission Counsel, Volume II, Tab 39? 20 A: Tab 39? 21 Q: Yes. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: This call is at 20:19, 23 My Friend asked me, and I'm not certain if you have to 24 add seven (7) minutes to this call. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: Now, it's 20:19 on September 6th, 3 1995 and this is the call -- 4 A: I'm sorry, sir -- just -- 5 Q: No problem. 6 A: Tab 39? 7 Q: Yes, Tab 39. It's the call -- you've 8 already been shown this transcript. It's the call 9 between you and Mr. McCabe. And I'm allowing you to 10 catch up, I'm doing a preamble for you. 11 A: Yeah, and I just -- my book goes from 12 38 to 64 and then to 40. 13 Q: I think you're in the wrong book. If 14 you go to Commission Counsel Volume II. I suspect you're 15 in a book provided by another party maybe. So Tab -- 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: Could you try Tab 35, I'm told by my 20 colleagues? 21 A: I just don't have a Tab 39. 22 Q: Or a 35? 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 Q: Thank you. For -- 2 A: Okay -- I'm confused. Am I on the 3 right page? 4 Q: Yes. For once and it doesn't happen 5 often, Inspector Wright, I actually got the Tab number 6 right. A: Okay. 7 Q: You can tell it doesn't happen often 8 because I have to declare a victory -- 9 A: I don't doubt you do -- 10 Q: -- it's very rare that I get it 11 right. So -- now, you'll see here that this is a 12 conversation that you were directed to by Mr. Millar. I 13 apologize, I didn't make the last Exhibit -- I didn't 14 make the last transcript an Exhibit and I would ask to do 15 that. 16 It's the transcript that refers to the 17 code of silence which I put the qualifier, by the way, 18 what Mr. Wright says that he wants us to listen and I 19 have no problem with that. 20 THE REGISTRAR: P-1156, Your Honour. 21 22 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1156: Transcript of Rob Graham - 23 Stan Korosec, September 24 06,1995, 17:13 hrs., Mobile 25 Command Unit, from OPP logger


1 tape number 3, Track 3, Disc 2 2 of 3, Region 15. 3 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 7 Q: Now, looking at Tab 39, this 8 conversation allegedly occurred at 20:19. Now -- 9 A: 20:19? 10 Q: On September 6th. So 8:19 p.m. And 11 you have to just work with me -- 12 A: Yeah, I -- 13 Q: -- because it's you and McCabe. 14 A: Sorry, sir, if I just have a minute 15 because I'm -- I've got a -- I've got a thing here with 16 McCabe and Wright but the time is -- oh, 19:48 you're 17 right. 19:48 to 23:20 hours. I just saw the 23:20 so I 18 was somewhat confused. Yeah, right, okay. 19 Yeah, I'm with you now, sir. My 20 apologies. 21 Q: I raise this to your attention 22 because, first of all, I didn't -- I didn't get the words 23 correctly, that is 100 percent right, before, or correct. 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Okay, the corrected -- 25 the initial -- the initial time is 20:19. The corrected


1 time is 20:25. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And for the record, 3 this isn't anybody's fault. What happens is these tape 4 machines, or the counter shows one thing but then 5 evidence is gleaned that tells us the real time. So 6 that's what's happening. 7 So as I understand the evidence to be that 8 this actually reflects the 20:25 conversation. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 11 Q: Now, the reason I ask you that is 12 because you just -- you had a conversation with John 13 Carson in and around 20:05, 8:05 p.m. -- 14 A: Right. 15 Q: -- and you expressed your frustration 16 with Linton in that call? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: The night of September 6th, hours 19 before the march, right? 20 A: Correct. 21 Q: Just after that call you have a call 22 with McCabe -- 23 A: Right. 24 Q: -- and this call I'm bringing to your 25 attention, which I don't know if this has been made an


1 exhibit? Sorry, I apologize, I just need an exhibit 2 number? 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Of course it has. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Sorry, I apologize, 5 I just need an exhibit number? 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Exhibit P-463. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. P-463 8 and Mr. Millar is probably getting frustrated with me, I 9 should know this stuff. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: In terms of the reference that I 13 wasn't accurate on, the reference that I wasn't accurate 14 on is I referred to "war" at page 21 but I referred 15 improperly; I said "fucking war". 16 You told McCabe, the Crown Attorney, at 17 20:25 quote: 18 "We're going to -- we're going to war 19 now. We're not going to be serving 20 anybody." 21 A: Right. 22 Q: Page 21; you see that? 23 A: I'm just catching up to you. Yeah, 24 I'm there. 25 Q: You tell that to McCabe?


1 A: Yeah. 2 Q: "We're going to war now. We're not 3 going to be serving anybody." 4 Right? 5 A: Right. 6 Q: And you testified to the Commissioner 7 earlier today that you were cool when you said that. I 8 asked you, did you maintain your cool when you said, 9 "we're going to war"? Was that an example of you blowing 10 or losing your cool or did you maintain your cool? 11 And it was your testimony that you were 12 cool when you said that? 13 A: Yeah, I was -- yeah, I was explaining 14 the situation as I saw it, yeah. 15 Q: Sure. Sure. And so these are the 16 words of a deliberately thought out statement? 17 A: No, I didn't say that. 18 Q: Okay. 19 A: I didn't say it was a deliberately 20 thought out -- as you know, and in this statement here 21 with McCabe I say, you know, Tim, to be honest with you 22 I'm listening to you with one ear and listening to 23 something else on the other ear. 24 So it's not as if we're having a very 25 quiet chat and I'm giving lots of thought about every


1 word that leaves my mouth into Mr. McCabe's ear. I'm 2 trying to tell him what's going on and while I'm doing 3 that I'm in an atmosphere where all sorts of information 4 is coming into the Command Post. 5 So my attention is split between 6 attempting to give him my view of what's going on and 7 also keeping up the pace with what I perceive to be an 8 escalation in and around the sandy parking lot area. 9 Q: Fair enough. And the part I'm most 10 interested in is and you also say, and we can find that 11 at page 3 -- 12 A: Page 3? 13 Q: Yes. The same -- 14 A: Okay. 15 Q: Quote: 16 "Well they're moving -- they're coming 17 out for a fight down the road so we're 18 taking all the marines down now." 19 A: Right. 20 Q: You say that at 8:25 p.m.? 21 A: Right. 22 Q: Now, you explained to Mr. Henderson 23 that the marines were CMU; you told him that. Do you 24 remember half an hour or an hour ago doing that? 25 A: Certainly they would be those people,


1 yeah. 2 Q: Yes, thank you. Now, the reason I 3 ask you that is that's kind of interesting because John 4 Carson arrives at incident command -- at the Command Post 5 at 8:29 p.m.? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: At 8:25 p.m. or 8:32 p.m., we don't 8 know which one, Stan Korosec says quote: 9 "Wade Lacroix is coming in to do them." 10 Right? 11 A: Right. 12 Q: You've agreed with me that Lacroix's 13 only role was to lead CMU. 14 A: Right. 15 Q: You say that Stan Korosec gets it 16 wrong when he talks about amassing an army and about war, 17 but to be fair, sir -- 18 A: Did I -- I didn't say he got it 19 wrong. I never made that -- 20 Q: Well, you said that he -- what he 21 said was inappropriate. I thought you said that, sir. 22 A: Yeah, I did. But you just said he -- 23 that what he said was wrong. 24 Q: Yeah. 25 A: Oh, I thought you meant as in


1 inaccurate, agree. 2 Q: Well, was it -- 3 A: My apologies. 4 Q: -- was it accurate that you were 5 amassing an army? 6 A: Well, no. No, we weren't amassing an 7 army. 8 Q: Well, thank you. So -- 9 A: Yeah. 10 Q: -- I thought the -- 11 A: Yeah, no. I agree -- I took it the 12 wrong -- 13 Q: Okay. 14 A: -- way. 15 Q: You said Korosec got it wrong about 16 amassing an army and wrong about going to war. We're -- 17 A: Right. 18 Q: -- going -- right? 19 A: Right. 20 Q: But, to be fair -- 21 A: Did he say we're going to war? I 22 thought I -- 23 Q: Let me read you back -- 24 A: -- said we're going to war. 25 Q: -- what 11:54 says, so that you have


1 it -- 2 A: Yeah. 3 Q: -- right in front of you. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Quote: 8 "Their day will fucking come." 9 Next quote, bottom of page 3: 10 "We want to amass a fucking army. A 11 real fucking army and do this -- do 12 these fuckers big time." 13 A: Right. 14 Q: Then the next passage that I put to 15 you was the Wade Lacroix passage that he said the next 16 day, that we're bringing in Wade Lacroix to do these 17 guys. 18 A: Yeah, well but -- 19 Q: Right. 20 A: -- you attributed to saying, we're 21 going to war and he didn't say that. 22 Q: Well, to be fair, sir -- 23 A: I'm just trying to be accurate. Sir, 24 you -- 25 Q: I understand.


1 A: -- attributed that statement to Mr. 2 Korosec. You're making great issue with particular words 3 and -- 4 Q: Yes. 5 A: -- terms. So, you know, as am I, 6 trying to be accurate. 7 Q: Fair enough. I take your point. 8 A: Okay. 9 Q: Amassing a fucking army, Do these 10 guys, Going to war, The Marines are coming down -- 11 A: Yeah. 12 Q: -- and the Marines are CMU. All of 13 those things are statements made by either Korosec, head 14 of ERT or Mark Wright, second in command at Ipperwash, 15 true? 16 A: True. 17 Q: Now, that's -- there's a number of 18 interesting things that we can glean from that, I'm going 19 to suggest to you. 20 Point number 1, is can -- none of those 21 statements have a notion, a standby, an option we might 22 use later. We're not sure what we should do. 23 They are definitive statements of intent, 24 correct? 25 A: No, I disagree.


1 Q: Okay. Fair enough, just wanted your 2 view on it. 3 Now, I want to understand about your 4 interaction with other officers because one of the things 5 that's apparent from some of the language you used, and 6 the answers you've given today, is there is a method of 7 speaking in almost militaristic terms during this 8 incident; would you agree? 9 A: That happened, yes, I would agree 10 with you that happened. 11 Q: And the militaristic terms by -- 12 between 8:00 and 8:30 that night, were in terms, as 13 you've put it, war, Marines -- 14 A: Yeah, battle. 15 Q: -- and on the previous day, you 16 talked about, quote, "Take the Park", close quotes, 17 right? 18 A: Yeah, I don't think that would -- I 19 don't consider that a military term. 20 Q: Okay. I'm going to suggest to you, 21 with the greatest of respect, sir, that this became a 22 rather complex game of cowboys and Indians to you and 23 your command team; true or false? 24 A: False. 25 Q: I'm going to suggest to you, sir,


1 that what really happened here was that on September 4th, 2 1995, what you knew was likely, indeed almost certainly 3 going to happen, which was the occupiers would move into 4 the Park over the Labour Day weekend happened, that 5 happened? 6 A: Right. 7 Q: That at 6:00 to 6:30 p.m. you met 8 with irate cottagers, right? 9 A: I didn't know that was going to 10 happen. 11 Q: But that's what happened? 12 A: Agreed, yeah. 13 Q: Yeah. Now, they're irate today, 14 because yesterday they weren't irate, then another day -- 15 A: Well, I -- 16 Q: -- they were irate and then -- 17 A: You know that's -- 18 Q: -- another day they weren't. I just 19 want to check which one they are. 20 A: Yeah, that's not fair. They -- they 21 weren't irate. My evidence-in-chief was that they 22 weren't irate and I said they were upset and they were 23 angry and I calmed them down and they left. 24 But I don't think I used the term irate. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Irate is a


1 term you used -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The reference is 3 to -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Irate is a 5 term that you used. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Who used the 8 term irate? 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: With great respect, 10 Mr. Commissioner -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I thought 12 that -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, just now 15 I mean. Just now. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes, just now, I 17 agreed with you. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 19 that's fine. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yeah. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 23 Q: You testified that they weren't irate 24 and you subsequently testified that they were. Then in 25 your notes, contemporaneous with the incident, you called


1 them irate; isn't that true? 2 A: I don't know, did I? 3 Q: Yeah. 4 A: Okay. Well, fair enough. 5 Q: I'm going to suggest something to 6 you, that you met with some very upset people who told 7 you that, as you put it, there wasn't any policing going 8 on, the same concern expressed and reflected May 31st, 9 '94 in your memo. 10 Do you remember saying that? 11 A: My recollection of what they had to 12 say, sir, was that they were upset with what was taking 13 place and they were going to march to the Park. 14 So, sure, I would have taken -- I would 15 have jumped to that conclusion what you're suggesting, 16 sure. 17 Q: And so you go down the street or 18 around the corner and you see some people by a fence line 19 with sticks or clubs and you stop, you gather some -- or 20 you investigate, it's fair? You investigate, right? 21 A: Quickly, sure, yeah. 22 Q: Yeah, quickly investigate it. And 23 then 7:55 p.m. represents less than five minutes after 24 you saw them you holding ERT down, right? 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry --


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I don't understand the 2 question. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough I'll 4 rephrase. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 8 Q: You saw these people in the sandy 9 parking lot? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: And by 7:55 p.m. on the night of 12 September 6, 1995, within minutes of after seeing these 13 people in the sandy parking lot, you're calling to have 14 ERT stand down, to have ERT stay back -- 15 A: No. 16 Q: -- hold the ERT shift back? 17 A: No, I don't think it's 7:55, I think 18 my -- my -- 19 Q: That was your evidence? 20 A: Well, no, my evidence was -- 21 Q: I'm sorry -- to help, page 58, 22 February 23rd, 2006. What was your evidence? 23 A: Pardon me. I thought my evidence 24 was, I came around the corner, saw what I saw, went to 25 first checkpoint, the second checkpoint and my


1 recollection is I was unsure as to whether I radioed in 2 or I actually went to the Command Post, but, and I don't 3 know if we have an exact time for that, are you telling 4 me we have an exact time for that? 5 Q: It's page -- page 58, February 23rd, 6 2006 -- 7 A: Okay. Okay. 8 Q: -- you refer to a 7:55 p.m. exchange. 9 You talk to Korosec -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- and you had the ERT shift held 12 back? 13 A: Okay. And so I'm down there -- I'm 14 just -- 15 Q: Yeah. 16 A: -- it's a litter longer than mere 17 minutes because I mean the drive from there and to stop, 18 I was, you know, I talked to those individuals, I stopped 19 at the two (2) ERT checkpoints and then I drove to the 20 detachment and then I held back ERT. 21 So, it would be a little bit more than 22 mere minutes, I would think, just the actual distance 23 involved and the time I took to stop. 24 Q: Can we agree -- 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: We actually have the


1 transcripts just to be fair. Exhibit P-114 is a radio 2 communication, Inspector Wright at 19:52 hours -- excuse 3 me -- 19:52 hours. 4 There's another radio communication, 5 Exhibit P-115 at 19:54 hours when Inspector Wright 6 reports into the Command Post about eight (8) individuals 7 at a picnic table and then the damage to the vehicle and 8 it's subsequent to that that he arrived back at the 9 Command Post. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just after-- 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: You'd agree that you spoke to Korosec 14 and as you described to Henderson and previously, you 15 made the decision yourself to hold back the ERT team? 16 A: Yeah, I'm not taking issue with your 17 -- the sequence, I'm just -- I took issue with the mere 18 moments, it was more than that, but, yeah, I don't take 19 any issue with that. 20 Q: And you'd agree with me, that in 21 terms of its timing, it would have happened less than 22 half an hour after you saw the individuals in the sandy 23 parking lot? 24 A: Oh, yeah, I'd agree with that, yeah. 25 Q: Right. And you'd also agree that the


1 only other incident that happened was your meeting with 2 the cottagers, prior to the meeting with the people in 3 the sandy parking lot? 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: All right. 6 A: And then -- and then we have the 7 damage to the vehicle, right? 8 Q: Hmm hmm. 9 A: I mean, that -- that also takes place 10 post meeting with the people on the roadway. And -- and 11 then I go back to the detachment and hold the day shift. 12 And I've already given my evidence numerous times about 13 why it is I thought we should hold back the day shift, so 14 I don't see the need to do that again. 15 Q: Right. And within minutes of you -- 16 and you have a conversation with Korosec, head of ERT? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: And it's in the context that you hold 19 back the ERT team? 20 A: I hold back the day shift guys, yeah, 21 the day shift ERT guys. Absolutely. That's all in 22 context, sir -- 23 Q: That -- 24 A: -- that we had there, sir, we had ERT 25 guys there.


1 Q: Right. 2 A: They were going off, they were a 3 means to an end, they were there, they were available, I 4 held them, no doubt about it. 5 Q: They were a means to an end? 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: And Korosec describes the end as 8 follows: 9 "Lacroix is coming down to do these 10 guys." 11 A: No. 12 Q: That was the end he described twenty- 13 five (25) minutes later? 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's not-- 15 THE WITNESS: I disagree with you, sir. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 18 Q: He doesn't describe it twenty-five 19 (25) minutes later? 20 A: Yeah, well no, you're making the 21 nexus here between the means to an end of the day shift 22 there and what Korosec had to say to Lacroix and I 23 disagree with you. 24 Q: And you disagree, fair enough. 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: And I'll move on, but, that is 2 exactly what my submission and question was. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 4 Move on. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 7 Q: Now, what I'm interested in is the 8 timing of all the different things that Mr. Sandler put 9 to you, so I'm just going to ask you to have regard to 10 the following exhibits. 11 And if I could just have P-1124 -- if I 12 could get Mr. Clerk to put in front of the Witness, you 13 don't have to read them all, but, I'm going to give you 14 the times of them; P-1124, P-1125, P-1126, P-1127, P- 15 1128. 16 So, P-1124 through 28. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you need 18 these exhibits in front of the Witness -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. If they -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- or can 21 you deal with it? Do you need them? 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- be put in front 23 of the Witness because I want the Witness to satisfy 24 himself about this. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I


1 don't think there's any issue about -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay. Fair enough. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 4 think there's any -- 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I'm going to 6 suggest to you that -- and so while Mr. Clerk is tracking 7 them down and it may be a waste of time and I don't want 8 -- I just want to be -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think it 10 may be. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: The notion of dozens of vehicles 14 coming from the back of the beach, that notion is a 15 notion that you -- if you heard it, you heard it at 9:25 16 at night? 17 A: Dozens of vehicles? 18 Q: It says -- there's a tape that 19 discusses vehicles from coming in back of the beach and 20 Mr. Sandler made a point of saying that was the 21 information that you had available to you; you remember 22 him asking that? 23 A: I think that was -- 24 Q: "Yes" or "no"? 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I don't want to


1 interrupt. 2 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'd just be grateful 3 if My Friend wouldn't frame all his questions as "Mr. 4 Sandler made the point", it's the evidence of the 5 Witness. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, you 7 asked a question and your witness -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well -- 9 MR. MARK SANDLER: I asked the questions 10 and I elicited answers. And it's his answers, not my 11 point. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think it's 13 a point well taken. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And Mr. Sandler is 15 making a point that's working. 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 18 Q: Mr. Sandler asked the question and 19 the question he asked you was: This would have been 20 information that you had available to you. And you 21 answered "yes". Do you remember the question? 22 A: No, I don't remember that -- 23 Q: Okay, then -- 24 A: -- particular -- but I'm not take 25 issue with --


1 Q: Sure. 2 A: -- you know, I was given -- 3 Q: And the issue about the vehicles that 4 he was putting to you through P-1124 as an exhibit was an 5 issue that arose at 21:25, right? 6 A: Yeah. 7 Q: And that would be one (1) hour after 8 Stan Korosec describes Lacroix as coming down to do these 9 guys; isn't it -- 10 A: Well, sir -- 11 Q: -- one (1) hour after or not; that's 12 my question? Is it one (1) hour after or not? 13 A: I think it is, yes. 14 Q: And it also is over an hour after you 15 told Mr. McCabe, "we're going to war"? 16 A: Okay. 17 Q: Yes? It's also an hour -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 19 minute. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: In fairness, in 21 fairness, the conversation which lasted a long time 22 started at approximately 20:25. The "go to war" 23 reference is at page 21 which is substantially within -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're going 25 to have to be more -- more specific --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, to be fair to 2 me -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- to be 4 fair to the Witness. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Mr. 6 Commissioner, I'm happy to correct it, but I'm not being 7 unfair by saying an hour. It just makes it forty (40) 8 minutes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, no. 10 Just carry on Mr. Falconer. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: It's forty (40) minutes before the 14 information reflected in P-1124. It's forty (40) minutes 15 before that that you say to Mr. McCabe "we're going to 16 war"; right? 17 It's one (1) hour before the information 18 in P-1124 that the head of ERT says, "Lacroix is coming 19 down to do these guys", right? 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: So there's no prospect that that 22 information that Mr. Sandler showed in you 1124 had 23 anything to do with your reference to the Marines or the 24 war, see? 25 A: Sir -- sir, I told -- in my evidence


1 I've said that what I told Mr. McCabe was my 2 understanding of what the situation was and what I 3 thought was going to happen based on the information that 4 I had. 5 And while I was talking to Mr. McCabe a 6 lot of information was streaming into the Command Post. 7 Now, I appreciate it's ten (10) years ago and this is all 8 time-stamped and that's fine, but that's the way it 9 happened. 10 Q: Fair enough. I'll keep moving. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We've been 12 over this already. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, we 14 haven't been over this point. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, we 16 have. We've been over this. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: To be fair to me, 18 Mr. Commissioner -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- we haven't gone 21 over it in the sense of the time -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just move 23 along. Just move along. 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'll keep it moving 25 efficiently.


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: The times reflected in P-1125, P- 3 1126, P-1127 and P-1128 are all tapes that occur between 4 21:26 and 21:39 hours in the night, correct? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: All right. And now that's how I'm 7 moving along. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: And you'd agree with the same 14 comments I said before, all of these things, all of this 15 information that Mr. Sandler made a point of bringing to 16 your attention that you would have heard would all be 17 subsequent, substantially subsequent, to your reference 18 to bringing the marines down, that you call CMU, and to 19 Korosec's reference to Lacroix being brought in to do 20 these guys, agreed? 21 A: Well, I never heard Korosec say that, 22 so we can just eliminate that completely because -- 23 Q: Well, slow down. I'm asking you, in 24 time, what Mr. Sandler put in front of you, in time -- 25 A: Well, I think --


1 Q: -- was all subsequent to Korosec's 2 statement about Lacroix coming down, yes? 3 A: I'll take your word for it, sir. 4 Q: Thank you. And if you look at P-1155 5 that refers to 8:25 or 8:32 you can not only take my word 6 for it -- 7 A: 1125. 8 Q: -- you can -- you can satisfy 9 yourself that Korosec's impression that Lacroix is coming 10 down to do these guys all happens before those things 11 that Mr. Sandler puts in front of you, right? 12 A: Okay. 13 Q: Now, if you go to P-1126, 27, 28, in 14 each case it is information that would have been floating 15 out there, but all information that takes place after 16 20:46 when the decision is made according to you that CMU 17 is to be deployed, correct? 18 A: That was my best guess, yeah. 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: Yeah. 21 Q: I just want to make sure that we have 22 this in order; that's all. 23 A: Well, sir, and if -- if I can be -- 24 to -- to fully answer your question is the fact that CMU 25 was deployed as far as I was concerned, at whatever that


1 time is that you gave, I mean at any point they're 2 leaving there, they're going down there, they're 3 marshalling. 4 As I recall they don't start walking down 5 that roadway until much later after the fact that all 6 these radio comms come in to which Carson and I and 7 everybody else in the Command Post would have heard. 8 So this is all information that was 9 relevant vis-a-vis CMU moving down the road. The fact 10 that Carson decided and my best guess is that whatever 11 that time was the he was going to go down there the fact 12 of the matter is they marched post this information. 13 Q: Fair enough. 14 A: So -- so Incident Command and all of 15 us there were alive to this information. So it's not 16 like this happened in isolation of CMU moving down the 17 road. 18 Q: I -- I take your point. It's a very 19 point. 20 What you're really saying is there's a 21 decision made to deploy CMU but given when CMU actually 22 marched on the occupiers there would have been an 23 opportunity to pull CMU back? 24 A: Yeah. I think Carson -- Carson in 25 his -- in his evidence said if they would have gone down


1 there and found them on the other side of the Park around 2 a campfire they would have -- they wouldn't have marched, 3 so I agree. 4 Q: At 8:00 -- at 7:58 p.m. you spoke 5 to -- 6 A: Sorry, 7:58? 7 Q: -- 7:58 you spoke to -- 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: Excuse me for a 9 moment. I may have this wrong but if My Friend has put a 10 series of exhibits that I put one (1) of them includes 11 1135 which -- the time of which is 20:28. 12 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: No. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I didn't put -- 14 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, that's my 15 point -- 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I didn't refer 17 to that exhibit. 18 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, that's my point. 19 My Friend is putting to -- to him these are the exhibits 20 that Mr. Sandler put to you; they're all after the time 21 and isn't put -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The ones I put in 23 front of him. 24 MR. MARK SANDLER: The one (1) -- okay. 25 Well, as long as the Commissioner understands that --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no and -- and 2 I want the record to reflect very clearly -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- that I -- that I 5 was very careful on what I put in front of him and what 6 didn't happen in my questioning -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: -- is I didn't gloss it. I put to 11 you that six (6) different exhibits that Mr. Sandler put 12 in front of you could not possibly have in any way 13 informed the decision to deploy CMU. 14 A: Sir, I was alive to the fact -- 15 Q: Thank you. 16 A: -- there were more than six (6) and 17 that you were just speaking about six (6). 18 Q: Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's move 20 on. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I appreciate that. 22 Let's move on. 23 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER:


1 Q: Tab 48 of P-444(B) there's a 2 conversation between you and Carson and we don't need to 3 turn it up, you've -- you've gone -- looked at it a 4 hundred (100) times. I was talking about the tab number 5 of the Exhibit P-444B rather than the tab number of the 6 binder but for your -- for your help, Inspector Wright, 7 it -- I -- I'm content -- I don't -- I don't need to put 8 the other -- I'm putting you the tab number for the 9 record. 10 You speak to Carson and you express -- 11 A: Are -- are you going to give me a tab 12 number where we are? 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Tab 36. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 16 Q: It's Tab 36. 17 A: Okay. Thank you. 18 Q: But you -- I do want you to know -- 19 A: I'm just saying -- yeah. 20 Q: That's fine. You -- you express your 21 frustration to -- to Carson -- 22 A: Right. 23 Q: -- and of course the frustration you 24 express at 8:05 p.m. -- 25 A: 8:05? Yeah.


1 Q: -- is one (1) in which you have met 2 with Linton and he is quote, "waffling" close quotes 3 right? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And there's no way when you start 6 that conversation with Carson, the other commander whom 7 you're talking to about your dissatisfaction with the 8 commander sitting in the trailer -- 9 A: My concern. 10 Q: Yeah. You're dissatisfied with him? 11 A: I'm concerned, sir, I'm concerned. 12 Q: You're concerned. 13 A: Yeah. 14 Q: While you talk to one (1) commander 15 about your concerns with the other commander there's no 16 possibility that the conversation started on your concern 17 over TRU team being deployed because as you said the 18 other day -- 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: -- you only found out what's going 21 on? 22 A: Right. 23 Q: So your concern I take it with Linton 24 was his failure to act, right? He waffled. 25 A: He waffled.


1 Q: Yeah. 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: What he didn't do was order CMU down 4 the road? 5 A: No, you're -- 6 Q: Did he do that? Just -- can you 7 answer that? Did he order CMU -- 8 A: Well, you know you're asking -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Give him a 10 chance to answer the question. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's double- 12 barrelled; it's double-barrelled -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just give 14 him a chance. Go ahead. 15 THE WITNESS: Please allow me to answer 16 your question. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Sandler rightly 18 points out the question is double barrelled. Let's back 19 up. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Answer the 21 question. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Let me split the 23 question into two (2) than fair enough. 24 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: First of all you'd agree with me that 3 your concern you expressed to Carson was that Linton was 4 waffling and not making a decision? 5 A: Agreed. 6 Q: Right. And then number two, in that 7 I'm going to suggest to you is he did not make a decision 8 as of the start of this call at 20:05 to deploy CMU? 9 A: It wasn't on the table then. 10 Q: It wasn't? 11 A: No, I've given my evidence to that, 12 very clearly. 13 Q: Yeah, I'm going to be arguing with to 14 Commissioner at the end of the day and out of fairness to 15 you, I have to put this to you. 16 It was on the table when you talked to 17 Korosec at 7:55 and Korosec was of the view these guys 18 should be done by Lacroix and you held back ERT to do 19 just that? 20 A: Well, you know -- it's an interesting 21 suggestion, but, for the facts sir, I disagree. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You've made 23 that suggestion and you're not accept it. Now, let's 24 just move on. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: Now, when you say, but for the facts, 3 will you agree with me on this front. That since you did 4 talk to Korosec at 7:55 p.m. -- 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Now, that not -- 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I can ask a 7 question -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not if it's 9 an inaccurate premise. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: You keep saying the 11 inaccurate time -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not if it's 13 an inaccurate premise. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No and I thought we'd 15 gone 16 through this. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I 18 thought so. 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: It's got to be fair to 20 the Witness. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: What's the time 22 that Mr. Millar is concerned about? 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, we know that he 24 was still in his car from those Exhibits I just read a 25 few minutes ago. And his evidence was as My Friend


1 pointed out, was that he spoke to the Command Post to 2 report on the people in the parking lot at 11:00 -- at 3 19:54. And in the transcript he was -- he thought he was 4 at Ravenswood at approximately that time, which is some 5 time away from Forest. 6 And so that it has to be at 8:00 or 7 thereafter the command, the minutes of the scribe notes 8 put him in the Command Post at 8:02. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. But, 10 the evidence that came out that mattered and I appreciate 11 the clarification, this Witness has already testified 12 that the determination or the decision of his to have ERT 13 members stay back was a decision he took himself and 14 which he discussed with Korosec and that was really the 15 point. 16 And if it was 7:55 p.m. or 8:02 p.m., I 17 stand corrected. But, I think that's the sum total of 18 Mr. Millar's clarification. Fair enough. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 21 Q: I'm still going back to you, sir. 22 And I'm saying whether it was 7:55 p.m. or 8:02 p.m., you 23 had come to a conclusion along with Korosec, who wanted 24 to do these guys, you'd come to a conclusion which you 25 then sought to implement through Linton, isn't that true?


1 A: Disagree. 2 Q: Isn't it true that when Linton didn't 3 buy in with decisive action that's when you expressed 4 your concern to Carson, isn't that true? 5 A: Sir, Linton's first response was, 6 let's go down there with the "B" team and helmets and K-9 7 and arrest them. 8 Q: So he didn't waffle -- 9 A: Well, you know, one question at a 10 time, if you may. And my response was, let's just tell 11 them to go into the Park. So you know, first you're 12 suggesting to me that I want to be aggressive and now 13 you're suggesting that he's waffling. I mean you -- it 14 cuts both ways, right, I mean that's the way it happened. 15 I gave you my evidence in-Chief. I've 16 told Korosec to hold back the day shift based on what 17 happened at 7:00 that morning with the picnic tables. 18 The day shift is the day shift. They were ERT guys. I 19 mean if they were uniform guys sitting in that parking -- 20 in the garage, I would have held the uniform guys back. 21 Q: Now, would you agree with me, that 22 whether you were questioned by Mr. Millar, Mr. Sandler or 23 anybody else, you could not find a piece of paper that 24 bears out the actual decision to issue the order to have 25 CMU march?


1 A: I would agree. 2 Q: Right. And that's an important 3 order? 4 A: I would agree. 5 Q: Right. And one way -- or one (1) 6 explanation that you probably reject but I want to put to 7 you, one (1) explanation is that the order never gets 8 made because it's something you and Korosec created, 9 isn't that true? 10 A: How -- that's just bizarre. Linton-- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He doesn't 12 agree with you. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's fine, thank 14 you. 15 THE WITNESS: Carson's down there with a 16 CMU unit, how do I have any kind of effect on CMU? 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 19 Q: Carson arrives at 8:29 p.m., minutes 20 after Korosec's states, Lacroix is going out to do these 21 guys? 22 A: You're suggesting I moved the CMU 23 down the road. How can I do that? 24 Q: I'm suggesting you created the 25 conditions to get CMU marching, true?


1 A: I disagree. Disagree. 2 Q: I suggest that you, in response to 3 the cottagers claim of inaction created and concocted an 4 event, such as the baseball bats incident, to suggest 5 there had been beatings on cars when there had not been, 6 to your knowledge subsequently, created an event with a 7 suggestion of a damage to a car that actually involved a 8 stone? 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is this a 10 question? 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: How can 13 anybody answer that question. I can't even follow it. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. I'll 15 unpack it then. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I can't even 17 follow it. 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'll withdraw and 19 start over. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 21 if that's -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's fine -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- anymore 24 helpful. This isn't -- 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Perhaps it's his


1 argument he wants to make at the end of the day. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I see your point. 3 That's fine. I've got to be fair to the Witness, but, at 4 the same time, I understand that can be left for 5 argument. I think I've put enough to the Witness on that 6 issue. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: I want to move on quickly to another 10 issue that I want to ask you about. We have canvassed 11 with you -- a number of counsel have, a number of 12 inappropriate statements that either you made or other 13 senior officers made. 14 You apologized somewhere in the range, we 15 counted as seventeen (17) times in the evidence in the 16 first number of days, and that may give you some kind of 17 a record in terms of witnesses here. 18 But be that as it may, with the apologies 19 in hand, you'd agree with me that senior officers who 20 engage in inappropriate language represent a somewhat 21 poor example to subordinate officers; as a general 22 principle would you agree with that? 23 A: I regret the language that I used, 24 sure. 25 Q: But now I'm asking you a different


1 question. 2 Senior officers who engage in 3 inappropriate language represent a somewhat poor example 4 to subordinate officers; would you agree with that? 5 A: Sure, I'd agree with that. 6 Q: And so I want to run a few statements 7 by officers you may or may not have had contact with as 8 second-in-command at Ipperwash and ask you whether or not 9 these sentiments were expressed to you. 10 And, in particular, I want to start off 11 with the following. Do you recall, and it's reflected in 12 the scribe notes, do you recall being assigned a task to 13 speak to a Sergeant Wells; do you recall that? 14 A: No. 15 Q: All right. Sergeant Joe Wells, 16 London Comm; does that mean anything to you? 17 A: I know the man. 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: But I don't recall speaking to him. 20 Q: And -- all right, I can refresh your 21 memory if you'd like. If you turn to the scribe notes in 22 the Commission Counsel's documents, Tab 18. 23 Would you look at Tab 18 please? 24 A: I'm there. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What page?


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 4 Q: Could you look at page 2 please? 5 A: Sure. 6 Q: Page 2 of Tab 18? Do you have that? 7 A: I'm there. Yeah. 8 Q: You see the reference at 21:28 hours 9 on September 4th, 1995; you see the scribe note reference: 10 "Mark Wright speak to Dan Grant get 11 trailer loaded for short term, maps, et 12 cetera. Assign Sergeant Wells then Dan 13 Grant come up" 14 You see that? 15 A: 21:28? 16 Q: Yes. "Mark Wright speak to Dan 17 Grant..."? 18 A: Yeah, I got it. Yeah. 19 Q: And that would be Sergeant Joe Wells? 20 A: Yeah. Probably, yeah. 21 Q: Now, I'm going to ask you -- I'm going 22 to ask you to listen to a statement by Sergeant Wells and 23 I'm going to ask you if he expressed a similar sentiment 24 to you in your role as a senior officer at Ipperwash. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I see Ms.


1 Jones coming forward. I think she may have an objection. 2 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, as I 3 understand it what is being proposed is a tape between 4 Officer Wells and someone who is not Mark Wright at all. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not Mark 6 Wright. 7 OBJ MS. KAREN JONES: At all. So I object to 8 playing calls and saying is this the kind of thing that 9 you might have heard from someone at some point in time. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I think 11 that's probably a fair objection. 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I agree. I frankly 13 agree with the objection and this man wasn't even on duty 14 when this particular call that I believe My Friend wants 15 to refer to was made. And -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: There must be 17 some useful relevant questions that you can ask at this 18 point, Mr. Falconer, that's not helpful --- 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: It's just simply 20 inappropriate, Commissioner. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- that's not 22 helpful. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, as 24 you put it, should I make submissions? 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, then with 2 great respect -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Move on. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Mr. Commissioner, 5 I can't do my job for my client if I'm not heard on an 6 objection. If Mr. Millar rises after Mr. Jones (sic) 7 rises and tells you their concerns surely I should -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I was going 9 to say it myself. So I'm satisfied that you can't ask a 10 witness something that he has absolutely no knowledge of. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, to be fair, 12 this is -- there's some irony here as Ms. Jones tendered a 13 media film in which this Witness said he saw nothing. I 14 objected and was told -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: A media film? 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- this Witness said 17 he saw nothing of the media clip. I was told this is not 18 a court -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: This isn't 20 the time for us to have argument, in any event. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, but I do 22 want to -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What you're 24 trying to do -- 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- make submissions


1 on the -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- is not 3 going to be -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- appropriateness 5 of the -- of the evidence. And with respect I accept that 6 I could be met with a negative ruling but I should be at 7 least be heard on it. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is it -- are 9 there a number of these. Can you make your submissions on 10 a number of them at one (1) time or on this one in 11 particular? 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I can make it on a 13 number of them at one (1) time if it suits? 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I mean are 15 there a number of matters that you wish to bring to our 16 attention -- 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: There are a number 18 of -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- that are 20 in the same category? 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes and no. But 22 yes. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If there are 24 matters -- 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: In other words,


1 they're different. Each one is different but the answer 2 is yes and I 3 have -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, what 5 are you proposing to do and we'll see if we can deal with 6 it in some way. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That allows 9 us to move forward. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The statements -- 11 there are anti-Aboriginal statements made by officers that 12 this officer would have had interaction with. The Joe 13 Wells transcript -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That this 15 officer would have had interaction with, I mean -- 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- it's the 18 statement that you want introduced, not the interaction. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I -- with great 20 respect, that's why I wanted to be heard. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, tell me 22 what you want to do. If he's had -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: --interaction 25 with them, how is that helpful? How is that relevant?


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: If Joe Wells tells 2 Mark Wright that he's Lucan's answer to the Black 3 Donnellys and if he gets his gun, as he says in this 4 transcript, he'll do damage. 5 Well, if he does that with Mark Wright, a 6 senior officer at Ipperwash, and Mark Wright knows that, 7 given the fact that Joe Wells was involved in the 8 Ipperwash matter, I want to find out how much Joe Wells 9 was involved. 10 I want to find out what this second in 11 command knew of what Wells expressed and when he describes 12 himself as "Lucan's answer to the Black Donnellys, a man 13 from Lucan", that's an extraordinary statement by a member 14 of the OPP in relation to Ipperwash. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But it's not 16 anything that this Witness knows anything about. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: We don't know, 18 because I haven't been allowed to ask him. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, well, 20 this isn't an expedition. We -- well, I don't know what 21 the situation's -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But in any -- any -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- at all. 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- effort I'm making 25 to raise these matters with this second in command is in


1 the context of wanting to give this Witness an opportunity 2 to address officers over which he had contact in the 3 discharge of his duties at Ipperwash. 4 These are people -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If he knew 6 something about -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- the issue. 9 But if he doesn't know anything about it -- 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Then -- then I move 11 on to the next -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- one. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's the 15 point I was trying to make. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. And I'm -- 17 happy to -- but I can't -- I'm not going to play the tape 18 and take up the time. I simply want to read -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what I 20 thought you were doing. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No. I want to read 22 him the transcript portion and move on. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, the question 24 should be, the first one (1) here is a conversation 25 between Joe Wells and Bob Cousineau at 3:22 on the morning


1 of September 27 when he's off duty. 2 Now, how does that help the Commission do 3 anything? And the man's not even on duty when -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what I 5 thought -- 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- this conversation 7 took place. I had no objection to some of his other 8 transcriptions -- trans -- transcripts he -- that he put 9 to the Witness who was with the person or close to the 10 person or speaking to the person. 11 But some -- he's not even on duty when this 12 conversation takes place. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't even 14 want to explore that. That's the point -- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, but -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- that's the 17 point that I thought you were making. 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: My point is -- no. 19 My point is not whether he was party to the statement that 20 day, my point is, in his work with Joe Wells, did he state 21 a similar sentiment to you, which is completely fair. 22 He either did or he didn't. 23 In other words, in the discharge of his 24 duties as I proved at page 2, 21:28 of September 4th, 25 1995, this officer had interaction with Joe Wells, an OPP


1 officer who declare he's Lucan's answer to the Black 2 Donnellys, and talks about what he's going to do with the 3 gun. 4 Now, in my submission, I'm allowed -- it's 5 obviously disturbing language by Joe Wells, but I'm 6 allowed to explore whether Sergeant Wells' sentiments were 7 shared with Mark Wright on another occasion in the 8 discharge of his duties, which is proper. 9 He's the second -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- in command. If I 12 had the -- if I had the incident commander, I'd ask him 13 the same thing. 14 It's not were you there when you're off 15 duty, it's was a similar sentiment expressed. If Joe 16 Wells thinks on day 1 this way, there's no reason to not 17 believe he'd think on day 2 the exact same way. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Mr. 19 Sandler? 20 MR. MARK SANDLER: This is my concern, and 21 let's -- let's deal with these matters globally. Excuse 22 me for a moment. 23 My Friend seeks to put several taped 24 conversations that were disclosed and -- and my answer to 25 that is simply this.


1 That if any of the parties -- and it's not 2 alleged that Mark Wright was present for any of these 3 conversations. 4 If -- or that he's a party to any of the 5 conversations. Some of the participants of the 6 conversations My Friend refers to have absolutely no 7 relationship to the events at Ipperwash. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: But that's not Mr. 9 Wells. 10 MR. MARK SANDLER: Yes -- 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Wells does. 12 MR. MARK SANDLER: It's -- if I can make 13 my submissions, please. 14 If a witness is relevant to your mandate, 15 your Counsel is calling that witness. If that witness is 16 being called, and that witness is a party to a 17 conversation, the conversation can be put to that witness. 18 That's fair, that's appropriate and it can 19 be dealt with. If My Friend has some issue about how the 20 OPP dealt with these when they -- when they were disclosed 21 more recently, then the Commissioner Boniface is going to 22 be here and My Friend can deal with that aspect of it. 23 So my respectful submission is it's covered 24 off in a way that's fair because if the Witness is 25 sufficiently relevant to the events at Ipperwash they'll


1 be on the stand and My Friend can cross-examine about 2 their participation in a conversation. 3 If on the other hand they're -- they're too 4 remote then this is not an inquiry into all events but 5 simply into the events at Ipperwash. 6 So my respectful submission is this is not 7 the Witness, this is not the time to deal with these -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's my 9 concern. 10 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- issues with great 11 respect. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Obviously 13 we've attracted attention here. Yes, Mr. Henderson? 14 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Yes, Commissioner, 15 I have just a short submission in favour of Mr. Falconer 16 being able to -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 18 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: -- to pursue this 19 line of questioning. 20 We have had over the course of the Inquiry 21 several three (3) party -- three (3) party interactions 22 where one (1) party is common to two (2) of them and of 23 course we - - the notes from the -- the Blockade 24 Committee meetings were people who were represented at the 25 meetings, were cross-examined on the notes of people who


1 did not represent them but there was one (1) common party 2 who was there doing the representation and then 3 subsequently interacting. 4 This is what I see as being an identical 5 situation where there is a common party who has interacted 6 with this Witness and there is no difference in asking 7 where a person has expressed a sentiment, did he express 8 it to you? If the answer is no of course that's the end 9 of it. 10 It's not adequate to go down to the 11 actual witness and discover later that he says, Well, I -- 12 I spoke to Mark Wright about this and we have no -- no 13 knowledge about that conversation. 14 In addition to which we have had numerous 15 cross-examinations mounted on the basis of conversations, 16 interactions, disclosures, publications, and everything 17 else which never involved the Witness at all which were 18 between other people whom the Witness did not interact 19 with who had no conversation with them and everything else 20 and I don't know why we would draw the line here when we 21 haven't drawn it elsewhere. 22 I appreciate the interest of time and 23 everything else but these are fairly straight forward 24 questions. I believe them to be short quotes to the 25 extent that I've seen them in the disclosures.


1 And if the answer is that these 2 sentiments were not communicated then that's the end of it 3 it won't take much time. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 5 Rosenthal, do you want to speak to this too? 6 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, sir. I also 7 rise to support Mr. Falconer's -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- right to ask 10 these questions. 11 Mr. Sandler said this is not the Witness to 12 ask these questions of but we must be able to ask 13 questions of more than one (1) witness if we're trying to 14 learn the truth of what happened and -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not if the -- 16 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- we must -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- can't be 18 helpful. 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: No, not if they 20 can't be helpful but how can it be helpful? Well, there 21 are two (2) different ways. Mr. Falconer suggested one 22 (1) and he wants to know if these witnesses expressed 23 similar sentiments to this Witness, to the sentiments they 24 expressed to other people at other times. 25 Number 2, this was a command officer at the


1 time, he was directing a lot of these officers and it 2 would be useful for you to know how this officer would 3 react to these statements had he heard them. 4 And we've heard a lot of aggressive 5 statements from this officer and we're going to be hearing 6 more about this. And we can't be -- be limited in the way 7 that Mr. Sandler suggests to just -- you can ask one (1) - 8 - one (1) witness about one (1) statement. 9 And -- and also I agree very much with what 10 Mr. Henderson said that there were not those kinds of 11 limitations with respect to the Aboriginal witnesses at 12 all. 13 We can look over the transcripts and see 14 many things that were put to Aboriginal witnesses about 15 what other people did, not part of the same command 16 structure but people who just happened to be there. Those 17 would be my submissions. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: How many of 19 these tapes are there? 20 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm sorry, I was just 21 going to add My -- My Friend said witnesses who where 22 there at the First Nations, Joe Wells was not at the 23 altercation just -- just to put context -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, is Joe 25 Wells' name mentioned here?


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes, in the scribe 2 notes -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: In the scribe 4 notes. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- page 2, 21, 28, 6 September 4th, 1995. It's -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We don't know 8 if it had anything to do with Ipperwash? 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, it did, it 10 did. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It did? All 12 right. How many of these -- 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And -- and in fairness 14 to the submission of Mr. Falconer -- in fairness to Mr. 15 Falconer I mean Joe Wells calls at 3:22 and in response to 16 -- in response to what he had been asked to do so that Joe 17 Wells simply -- the comments made by Mr. Wells on this 18 particular recording are in my view simply inappropriate 19 and -- and we're going to deal with it in one (1) way or 20 another with Commissioner Boniface but I don't disagree 21 with that. 22 I'm -- my only point is I'm not certain how 23 this Witness can help us. It's not -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If he was off 25 duty.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- that the comments 2 are -- and perhaps My Friend can read the comments to him 3 that he's concerned and ask if -- if the Witness -- if Mr. 4 Wells ever expressed that to him -- to him? 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Can you go 6 through these -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- these 9 tapes in that way? 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Let's see if 12 we can deal with it that way. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 16 Q: On September 5th, 1995 at 3:18 in the 17 morning, Sergeant Joe Wells said the following to Officer 18 Cousineau at Command Post, quote -- I'm at page 2, quote: 19 "Any killing..." 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Jones is 21 still on her feet. He's just going to ask -- 22 MS. KAREN JONES: Sorry, Mr. Commissioner, 23 I hadn't understood, have you made a ruling that Mr. 24 Falconer is allowed to go through this exercise? 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've decided


1 that he can do it the way Mr. Millar suggested he can with 2 his first tape. We'll see how it goes. 3 MS. KAREN JONES: Okay. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 6 Q: Joe Wells, quote: 7 "Any killing? 8 BON COUSINEAU: Not yet. 9 JOE WELLS: Jesus. 10 BOB COUSINEAU: Now, Joe. 11 Joe Wells: I want to come down there. 12 I wanna bring my gun. 13 BOB COUSINEAU: Jump in with John 14 tomorrow. JOE WELLS: Canada's answer 15 to the TRU team. 16 BOB COUSINEAU: Pardon me? 17 JOE WELLS: Canada's answer to the TRU 18 team, (inaudible) I'm Lucan's Black 19 Donnelly. Turn me loose." 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And then: 22 "BOB COUSINEAU: The mad dog in front 23 of the Comm Centre." 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay, is this 25 a conversation between these two --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you want 3 to ask -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Now, I've -- I've 5 addressed -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- if he's 7 heard anything -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- the major 9 portion -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- of the -- this 12 particular passage I want to put about Sergeant Wells' 13 sentiments. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Go ahead. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 17 Q: Now, first of all, you spoke to 18 Sergeant Wells, as reflected in the scribe notes; is that 19 fair? 20 A: It would appear so, yeah. 21 Q: Yeah. And in the time that you spoke 22 to Sergeant Wells, did he express a desire to attend at 23 the Ipperwash incident, bring his gun, and did he describe 24 himself as Lukan's Black Donnelly? 25 A: Not that I recall.


1 Q: All right. I'm going to ask you, are 2 you familiar with what Lukan's Black Donnelly is? 3 A: Yes, sir, I am. 4 Q: All right. So you're familiar with 5 the fact that a police officer was put on trial for murder 6 in the 1800's in relation to vigilante justice? 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 8 why you need to go into this? 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well because I now-- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He didn't 11 express it to him. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, but I'm asking 13 if he expressed the content of what I'm about to ask him 14 about? In other words -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He said he 16 didn't. 17 MR. MARK SANDLER: He just said that he'd 18 never expressed this content -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, so what's 20 the point of explaining what it is to him. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I'm trying to 22 do it the short -- 23 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, this isn't the 24 short way. This is posturing, with great respect. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes.


1 MR. MARK SANDLER: He said that he didn't 2 know. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, it's just the 4 usual from Mr. Sandler. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. You're 6 not -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Sandler is 8 always entitled to say what -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's not 10 being helpful to go on. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- counsel intends 12 to do. But if counsel responds by saying that Mr. Sandler 13 is doing damage control, then it would be inappropriate 14 for me to answer Mr. Sandler that way, but it's okay for 15 Mr. Sandler to accuse me of posturing. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, it's not. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: If we're going to be 18 fair, he shouldn't editorialize and neither should I? 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, neither 20 of you should. Now, let's move on. If he doesn't know 21 anything about it -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- move on, 24 please. We have to get to the end of this somehow. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's fair. That's


1 fair. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And, you 3 know, your time is not going to be extended. So let's 4 carry on. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If there are 7 any there that there's a possibility that -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- have some 10 relationship, it would be useful if you went to those. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 14 Q: I'm at September 5th, 1995 at 11:00 15 a.m., in a conversation between Inspector Gordon and Rob 16 Huntley. And those transcripts, I believe, were put in 17 front of you already, Inspector Wright; do you have that 18 handy? 19 A: I've read it. I've seen it. I don't 20 know when I saw it but I've seen it. Go ahead. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, 22 what is this? This is a conversation between -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: September 5th, 1995 24 between Inspector Gordon and Rob Huntley. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: This isn't


1 helping me because I don't know where and when and -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, that's fine. 3 I'm going to put the copy in front of you. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, that's 5 fine. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: You had a yellow 7 folder -- you had a yellow folder in front of you -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I do. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- by Commission 10 Counsel. 11 THE WITNESS: What's the date and time 12 again, sir? 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: September 5th, 1995 14 at 11:00 a.m. 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The yellow folder that 16 has ALST on it. It will -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I have it. 18 MR. DERRY MILLAR: This is at Region 1, I 19 believe. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's correct. 21 It's Region 01, Mobile Unit logger tape number 1 -- 22 THE WITNESS: Regional 1? 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- track 1, disk 1 24 of 3. 25 THE WITNESS: Got it.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Do you have it yet, 2 Mr. Commissioner? 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. I have 4 the folder here but just get to the point. And if he 5 knows something about it then we'll go on. If not, move 6 on. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: Now you know Rob Huntley, yes? 10 A: Correct. 11 Q: He worked in the Command Post? 12 A: I can't remember. He was an ERT 13 officer, I believe. 14 Q: All right. And also you know James 15 Gordon? 16 A: Retired Inspector, yes. 17 Q: All right. Would you agree with me 18 that at page 2, September 5th, 1995, an incident is 19 described to Inspector Gordon. Now, Inspector Gordon is 20 being called by Huntley about a boat. They called the 21 boat a 'Graham' (phonetic); is that fair? 22 A: Yeah, I know nothing about this 23 conversation. 24 Q: Right. Now I want to know, though, 25 you had interactions with both Mr. Huntley and Mr. Gordon,


1 correct? 2 A: When, at Ipperwash? 3 Q: Yes. 4 A: I'm sure I had -- I'm sure I would 5 have run into Rob Huntley, but I don't think Inspector -- 6 Inspector Gordon, I think, sir, is in Mount Forest. 7 Q: Okay. 8 A: So he's not at Ipperwash. 9 Q: The occupiers are described by 10 Inspector Gordon as, quote -- page two, quote: 11 "A bunch of arsholes." 12 Rob Huntley states in response, quote: 13 "Yeah, yeah, that's actually a very nice 14 way to describe them." 15 Now let me ask you, first of all, did 16 either Rob Huntley, Officer Rob Huntley or Inspector 17 Gordon express that sentiment to you about the occupiers? 18 A: No. 19 Q: Would you agree that that sentiment is 20 inappropriate? 21 A: By Gordon, sure. 22 Q: All right. Now, I want to draw your 23 attention to September 7th, 1995. 24 A: Do you have a region number? 25 Q: Yes, region 08. My apologies.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry, 2 what's the date of that? 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's September 7th, 4 1995, 1:13 in the morning. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Between whom? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Chatham comm. centre 7 and Terry McIntosh (phonetic). 8 THE WITNESS: I don't have that one. 9 Maybe I do and I've overlooked it, stand by. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: No, that's fine. If you take a look 13 at the top, it should say region 08 -- 14 A: Yeah, I'm looking -- 15 Q: Got it? 16 A: No, I'm familiar where to -- there it 17 is, I've got it, it's just hidden in amongst the pile 18 here. 19 20 (BRIEF PAUSE) 21 22 Q: Do you recall -- 23 MS. KAREN JONES: Sorry, Mr. Commissioner, 24 I stand to be corrected but, I don't -- to my knowledge, 25 one of the people in this call is not identified at all.


1 And the other person, so far as I understand, wasn't at 2 Ipperwash. This is simply -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He has to 4 establish to some connection to Ipperwash or to this 5 Witness first -- 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm about to do 7 that. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- and if he 9 can't do that then he's going to move on. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, that's fair 11 enough. That's right. And I intend to do that. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 15 Q: Do you recall an individual by the 16 name of Terry McIntosh? 17 A: Do I know him, yes. 18 Q: Sorry? 19 A: I know Terry McIntosh. 20 Q: Thank you. And he is employed by the 21 OPP? 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: Thank you. Now, Terry McIntosh 24 engages in a conversation where the following -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Does he have


1 anything to do with -- 2 THE WITNESS: He wasn't at Ipperwash. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, but -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If he has 5 nothing to do with Ipperwash -- 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It does. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It refers to the 9 fucking Indians in reference Ipperwash. That's what the 10 transcript says. All I'm asking is to be able to put, to 11 this Witness, the racist remarks expressed by OPP officers 12 or OPP employees and ask him to -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: In connection 14 with Ipperwash? 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And ask him-- 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And ask how it's 18 expressed, in connection with Ipperwash? 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And ask him 20 if he's ever expressed a similar sentiment to him? 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 22 That's all I want. 23 OBJ MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 24 object to this. Neither of the people in this call are at 25 Ipperwash, are involved in Ipperwash or take part in it.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I -- 2 MS. KAREN JONES: And it's incredibly 3 unfair to use this as a mechanism to put irrelevant things 4 before this Witness and then ask him to make a 5 pronouncement on it. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You may be 7 right. Mr. Millar, in the case where they have no 8 connection to Ipperwash, it's pretty hard for me to see 9 how that's helpful or relevant. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 11 the issue -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Through this 13 Witness. I'm talking about through this Witness. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: What I'm saying, the 15 issue from Aboriginal Legal Services point of view is, if 16 the OPP -- if the OPP experienced these kinds of 17 sentiments, that is if Mark Wright experienced these kinds 18 of sentiments from Terry McIntosh, his reference is quote: 19 "I don't -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ever, 21 anywhere under any circumstances, anywhere -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: In relation to 23 Ipperwash. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, 25 that's --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: "I don't give a shit 2 about the stupid, fucking Indians." 3 That's the quote at page 2. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: My Friend is just doing 5 -- you know -- it's simply grandstanding. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, no My 8 Friend should have tendered -- he should not do this 9 because I'm put in a very awkward position. If name 10 calling can get engaged in by one side, then it has to be 11 engaged in by the other -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: There's no -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I don't want to have 14 to say why am I tendering this. I want to establish, once 15 and for all, what is acceptable to the OPP and what is not 16 as the second in command at Ipperwash. 17 If the incident commander were here, I'd 18 deal with him. I have an individual from the OPP 19 expressing a sentiment in relation to Ipperwash about the 20 Natives, about Natives being shot and how he feels about 21 it as an employee of the OPP. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I have -- 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's all I want to 25 do.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I have no -- I'm 2 calling the Commissioner of the OPP. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, we're 4 going to hear this, this is not -- 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I got to just point 6 out to My Friend, Mr. Falconer, that until last week, Mr. 7 Falconer didn't ask to hear the five thousand (5,000) 8 hours. 9 We disclosed all of the -- all of the -- 10 the summary prepared by the Commission, the Commission is 11 dealing with these issues. And for him to suggest that 12 somehow the Commission is not, is simply inappropriate 13 and -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, it's always 15 inappropriate -- 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- the issue -- 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- if I respond -- 18 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- to the 20 allegations of posturing. You see, it's inappropriate 21 when I respond -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 23 minute. 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's inappropriate 25 when I respond, but it's appropriate for Mr. Millar to


1 take shots at me. That's my problem -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- with this style 4 of advocacy. I agree we shouldn't take shots. If Mr. 5 Millar doesn't accuse me of posturing and makes his 6 objection, then we go on -- 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No, but -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- but when he makes 9 a shot, he's got to expect a shot back. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, he -- 11 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, I don't mind the 12 shot, but when there's an objection to a piece of 13 evidence, you don't, in any Court in the land, in fairness 14 in an Inquiry, once the objection is made, you don't then, 15 as this Counsel has done, read the part that which the 16 objection is made. 17 That's simply the point. If -- until you 18 make the ruling, it shouldn't be done. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And My Friend knows 21 that. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right, 23 it -- 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: But My Friend, for 25 whatever reason, decided, before you made your ruling,


1 while the submissions were being made, he was going to 2 read it. 3 That's all the point I was going to make. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 5 Now, where are we now? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And I don't want to 7 engage My Friend in how Courts, including Inquiries, have 8 taken a more liberal approach to evidence. And they 9 generally like to hear what it is they're ruling on before 10 they make the ruling and there's nothing improper about 11 that. 12 But having said that, Mr. Commissioner, I 13 have two (2) or three (3) more passages and all I'm saying 14 is that if your ruling is to the effect that since Mr. 15 McIntosh wasn't involved in running Ipperwash, then I'll 16 live with that and go to the ones -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Then live 18 with it and move on -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- where 21 there's some connection. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fine. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 24 Let's move on. 25 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: If I may,


1 Commissioner, I -- having looked at the transcript, there 2 is a reference to the person -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It -- 4 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: -- I won't talk 5 about it, but a reference to the person shot, who I 6 represent, and what I consider to be an unbelievably 7 callous comment. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It'll come up 9 in another -- 10 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: And my concern 11 is that I don't know, to my knowledge, this person is not 12 yet being called as a witness. And the last thing I want 13 to do is have the Commission overloaded with a huge number 14 of witnesses. 15 But this statement -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, which 17 one? 18 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: -- must be seen 19 somehow by the Commission -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It'll come 21 out somehow. 22 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: -- is all I want 23 to represent. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: These will 25 come out; we've already said that.


1 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Thank you. 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, in response -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Through an 4 appropriate witness. 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: --to Mr. Klippenstein's 6 reasonable concern, and I agree with his concern that -- 7 about these statements. We have identified these 8 statements, we're going to deal with these statements -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- through Commissioner 11 Boniface -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The 13 appropriate witness at the appropriate time, Commissioner 14 Boniface. 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, and -- and we're 16 calling her. And -- and I agree with Mr. -- actually I 17 agree with Mr. Falconer that -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't want 19 to hear from him -- 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- these statements -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- I want to 22 move on. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- are inappropriate. 24 My point is simply we're going to deal with it, with the 25 person, in my submission, which should be --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We started at 2 nine o'clock this morning and it's almost five o'clock, 3 and quite frankly, I'm exhausted, and I'm sure that the 4 Witness is as well. 5 So if we -- 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: So am I. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And if you 8 are too, then let's -- 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm trying. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- let's get 11 this through. Yes...? 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't... 16 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Yes, Commissioner. 17 Again, the same point. There is a relationship between 18 the person making the statement and an interaction -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's too 20 removed -- 21 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: -- with this 22 Witness. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If it's not 24 connected through Ipperwash, it's too far removed. 25 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: I take that point,


1 Commissioner. And I also have heard Counsel say that all 2 of this will be dealt with through Commissioner Boniface, 3 who is far more remote that this person. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, she's 5 not, who has -- 6 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Who interacts -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- some 8 responsibility for dealing with these matters, and who can 9 put them into some proper context, and that's why we're 10 calling her. 11 MR. WILLIAM HENDERSON: Is it apparent 12 Commissioner that this Witness had no responsibility in 13 these matters? 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, no, 15 that's what he just established. That's what the Counsel 16 is just establishing, if there's no connection then I want 17 him to move on. 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, he said he 19 knew Mr. McIntosh. I didn't get a chance to ask how or 20 whether Mr. McIntosh -- I didn't, because I was cut off by 21 -- by an objection. 22 I simply asked, did you know McIntosh? If 23 he says he doesn't know him at all, then he couldn't 24 possibly have had an interaction. 25 But if he knows him, then I go on to the


1 next -- to seek to define the interaction. That's all I 2 was proposing to do. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If it has 4 anything to do with Ipperwash, then it may have some 5 relevance. 6 If it doesn't, then -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, that's -- 8 that's where I was at -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: His 10 interaction, I mean, yes. 11 Yes, Ms... 12 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I was 13 just going to say that the key thing the Inspector said, 14 it seemed to me, is that this person wasn't at Ipperwash. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, but neither 16 was Inspector Robertson -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, that's 18 fine. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- who was told -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It doesn't 21 have to be -- 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- when Ed Robertson 23 was told -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I understand 25 that.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I'm going to take 2 the Park. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It doesn't 4 have to be at Ipperwash -- 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- to have 7 some connection with Ipperwash. Carry on. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: You said that you knew Mr. -- 11 A: McIntosh. 12 Q: Thank you sir. You said that you knew 13 -- now I owe you. You said that you knew Mr. McIntosh; in 14 what context did you know him? 15 A: He was a Constable at Petrolia. 16 Q: An OPP Constable at Petrolia? 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: To your knowledge, did he have any or 19 discharge any duties in relation to the Ipperwash matter? 20 A: To my knowledge, no. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Now move on. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. I need 23 to make sure I understand the Witnesses evidence. 24 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: When I say Ipperwash matter, I'm 3 referring to CFB, I'm referring to Ipperwash West and I'm 4 referring to Ipperwash Park. Could you consider my 5 question in that context, please? 6 A: I don't recall him ever being there. 7 He may have taken some training for West Ipperwash and if 8 he did his name will appear in the log for the training 9 for West Ipperwash. 10 Q: As a Constable at Petrolia, would you 11 agree -- I mean Mr. McIntosh, as a Constable at Petrolia, 12 would you agree that part of his duties, as you described 13 in May '94 and in that time period when Wade Lacroix was 14 incident commander, part of the duties of these officers 15 was enforcement in respect of this difficult situation you 16 described, officers like McIntosh -- 17 A: You know, sir, I don't remember -- at 18 one point McIntosh goes -- is transferred. And I don't 19 know -- I mean we're talking a long time ago, quite 20 frankly, and he may have not -- like I'm not sure if he's 21 still at Petrolia at that time, or if he's moved on to 22 another unit in Windsor. I mean, I just -- there were a 23 lot of people and -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: This is just 25 too far --


1 A: -- Terry wasn't involved. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- this is 3 too far removed. Go onto the next. 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: How many do 6 you have left? 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I believe and I'm 8 going to check in a minute. I believe I'm on my last 9 transcript. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 Carry on. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 14 Q: I'm now at September 5th, 1995, 13:38, 15 you've already given evidence about Rob Huntley and his 16 role. Are you following -- 17 A: Have you got a region number so I can 18 refer -- 19 Q: Yeah, and I keep doing this to you -- 20 A: No problem -- 21 Q: -- because this one doesn't have a 22 region reference. It's mobile command unit logger tape 23 number 1, track 1. So if you just look at the top of the 24 page you'll see September 5, 1995, 13:38; you see that? 25 A: Not yet.


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: I have copies, Mr. Commissioner, a 4 very easy way would just be to pass the two copies up. 5 A: Thank you. 6 Q: Now, this is a conversation of 7 September 5th, 1995 at 13:38 with Rob Huntley. 8 "Rob Huntley. Linda, OPP Dispatch. 9 Well hello OPP Dispatch, hello it's Rob 10 Huntley. Yes Rob? Down here in 11 beautiful, sunny, southern Ontario. L: 12 Are you having a good pow wow. All 13 right. Yes -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, you have 15 to establish some connection to Ipperwash. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I already did. He 17 already testified about Huntley and his role. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He did? I'm 19 sorry, I didn't hear that. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Do you recall the 21 testimony you gave? 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Huntley -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Go ahead. 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Huntley was there. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. That's


1 fine. Carry on, I'm sorry. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm sorry, I was 3 short forming and I thought I'd... 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 6 Q: "Rob Huntley, down here in beautiful, 7 sunny southern Ontario. 8 L: Are you having a good pow-wow? 9 RH: Yes, yes, I am in the Command Post 10 where the air is conditioned and the 11 coffee is hot. 12 L: And you can sort out all those nasty 13 things out. 14 That's right. What I'd like to do is 15 talk to an NCO if you've got one there." 16 Then there's some small talk then: 17 "Rob? 18 RH: Yes? 19 I put a little note in front of him. 20 What kind of words does he use if you 21 put a note? 22 L: So what are you guys doing down 23 there? Like, you're not giving them the 24 Ipperwash? RH: Well, I can't give you 25 all that top secret stuff over the


1 phone. 2 L: Oh, oh, oh. 3 [Page Two] Maybe in person I could. 4 L: Oh, oh, oh, otherwise you'd have to 5 kill me. 6 RH: Yeah, something like that. 7 L: I'll see it on the news then. 8 RH: That's it. You'll see more than I 9 know then, I'm in the Command Post, I'm 10 in the dark here. 11 L: I just thought it was kind of 12 straight forward they'd get the stuff 13 back, we'd give it to them, the 14 buildings and everything. 15 RH: And we'd just pay more taxes so 16 that we could afford to build houses on 17 it for them. 18 L: Oh come on. 19 RH: [Chuckling]. 20 L: Now, we're going to give to them 21 with houses. 22 RH: Yeah, don't you think that's right, 23 because you and I stole that land from 24 them. 25 L: Oh yeah, but, we've put all these


1 nice little barracks on it, paved the 2 roads and all that ammunition. 3 RH: Yeah, yeah, which we're looking 4 forward to seeing. 5 I'll put you through." 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Who is L? 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Sorry? 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: There's a 9 name, L, here I don't know -- 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I believe it's 11 unidentified at the -- L at OPP dispatch? 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Huntley from Command 14 Post is speaking to dispatch. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And Huntley is 17 engaged in, I would respectfully submit, an anti-Native 18 discussion about his personal views on the legitimacy of 19 land claims. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's if he 21 said anything like that to this Witness, is that your 22 question? 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Exactly, that's 24 where I'm going next. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: Now having heard this exchange by 3 Officer Huntley, first of all, would you agree with me, it 4 was an inappropriate expression of views during the 5 conduct of his work at Ipperwash? 6 A: It appears to be so, yes. 7 Q: All right. Has Officer Huntley ever 8 expressed such views to you? 9 A: No. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: Have you heard similar -- 14 A: No. Sorry. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, that's 16 it, that's it. I want you to move on. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay, fair enough. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's five 19 o'clock, your time is up and I'd -- 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- like you 22 to bring your examination to a conclusion. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I am -- I have -- I 24 have some quick questions in one (1) very clean area; it's 25 not a super objection area.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Quick 2 conclusion. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough then. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Bring this to 5 a conclusion. 6 7 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 8 Q: Could you please turn back to the -- 9 yes, I'd like to mark that last one as an exhibit, the 10 Huntley transcript please? 11 THE REGISTRAR: P-1157, Your Honour. 12 13 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1157: Transcript of Rob Huntley, 14 September 05, 1995, 13:38 15 hrs., Mobile Command Unit, 16 Logger tape number 1, track 1, 17 disc 1 of 3, 7:43 at 5:55:59. 18 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'd also like to 20 mark as an exhibit the Wells' transcript. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That's the one we had 25 the problem with and --


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, it's -- 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- we -- My Friend read 3 in the parts from that transcript that he wanted to -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It was 5 unconnected. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No, no, no. He -- he 7 read -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- the parts -- the 10 parts of the transcript that he wanted the Witness to 11 respond to -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- and it's already in 14 the record. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So you don't 16 need to put it in at this stage. Go on. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 19 Q: I'm going to ask you to turn to Tab 9 20 of Commission Counsel documents. This will be quite 21 quick. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: This is --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- back to those 3 training materials. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're not 5 going to open up a whole new area now? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I am -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 8 bringing it to conclusion. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I am. I'm bringing 10 this to a conclusion. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It is a new area but 13 it's very quick. 14 15 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 16 Q: In the Tab 9 there is a reference to 17 training that's given in both May '94 and June '95; is 18 that according with your recollection? 19 A: Yeah. 20 Q: And it's fair to say that you were one 21 (1) of the instructors on the course -- 22 A: Yeah. 23 Q: -- for both May '94 and June '95? 24 A: Yeah. 25 Q: And it's fair to say that the title of


1 these -- of these courses -- that these courses related to 2 OPP operations, in essence, how to enforce the law with an 3 OPP -- 4 A: West -- West Ipperwash Beach 5 policing -- 6 Q: Right. 7 A: -- problems; specifically West 8 Ipperwash Beach. 9 Q: I'm looking at an attendance record 10 and this is just an example. If you go to the end of the 11 package and you go three (3) pages back? Just go -- 12 A: Right. 13 Q: -- straight to the end of the package 14 and -- 15 A: Yeah. 16 Q: -- then flip three (3) pages back. 17 You see just a standard attendance record, right? 18 A: Yeah. 19 Q: And you see how it says, "Program 20 Ipperwash Operations?" 21 A: No, I don't see that. 22 Q: Hmm hmm. 23 A: Oh, yeah, I got it, yeah. 24 Q: Do you see that? 25 A: Yeah.


1 Q: And it says, May 18th, '95 a.m.? 2 A: Yeah, yeah. 3 Q: Do you see how it says, Bouwman, 4 Wright, and Seltzer? 5 A: Yeah. 6 Q: All right. And then the previous page 7 you actually have Linton attending, if you look at that? 8 Just flip to the previous pages out of interest. I want 9 to bring it to the Commissioner's attention? 10 A: Yeah. 11 Q: See that Linton attends? 12 A: Yeah. 13 Q: It looks like 15:00 hours, plus; 14 that's what that entry looks like. Is that your 15 handwriting by the way? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Okay. But in any event that's what it 18 looks like, Linton attended 15:00 hours plus. Now by May 19 1995 you're -- the gist of your evidence was you were 20 getting information that there was a possibility of a 21 takeover of the Park down the road, correct? 22 A: By May 18? 23 Q: By May '95. 24 A: By May '95. 25 Q: I can take you --


1 A: Yeah, yeah. Sure, just -- I just need 2 a moment to do that, sir. 3 Q: No, no, that's fine. So by May '95 4 you were getting some information there was a possibility 5 of the takeover of the Park, correct? 6 A: I think that's correct, yes. 7 Q: Right. 8 A: I don't take issue with that. 9 Q: Now, the -- the reason I ask you that 10 is this training would have been training not only to deal 11 with what had happened but to deal with these issues as 12 they develop; that was the point, right? So in May '95 13 you'd be training -- 14 A: Well, no. This training was with West 15 Ipperwash Beach, sir. 16 Q: Okay. Only? 17 A: I mean -- well, you have to go back to 18 the training manual. 19 Q: Well, that's fair. 20 A: -- and that's what we -- that's why 21 it's in here. 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: This is what we talked about. This 24 is exactly what we talked about, so. 25 Q: Okay. And -- and in fairness to you,


1 actually, there is a reference by Bouwman to the fact that 2 it's a West Ipperwash training course now that I look. 3 It's in documents before that -- 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: -- that we didn't pick up on before? 6 Thank you. Now, I just want to understand something. It 7 -- it is completely accurate to say, though, that it was 8 police operations as they related to Ipperwash -- 9 Ipperwash West, yes? 10 A: Agreed. 11 Q: And it was unique in the sense that 12 you're training police officers. And I see all common 13 names to what's come up in this case; I see Speck, I see-- 14 A: Everybody. 15 Q: -- Dew, I see Poole. They're all 16 getting trained? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: They're getting police training? 19 A: Right. 20 Q: And the idea of the police training is 21 to teach them how, as police officers, among other things 22 for example, to stay neutral. 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: And as police officers on how to 25 enforce the law?


1 A: Yeah, that particular situation, yeah. 2 Q: I -- I'm curious as to why then 3 Ministry of Natural Resources employees would have been 4 receiving this training. 5 A: I have no idea, are they on here? 6 Q: Yes, if you could go to -- two (2) 7 pages back, at the end of the package? 8 A: Yeah. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: You see that? 13 A: No, I don't. 14 Q: The second to last page? 15 A: Oh yeah, MNR Pinery, yeah. 16 Q: MNR Pinery -- 17 A: Yeah. 18 Q: -- Les Kobayashi, MNR Pinery 19 Ipperwash? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: Crawford Robert, MNR Pinery Ipperwash, 22 you see that? 23 A: Yeah, I do. 24 Q: And then if you go to the previous 25 year of May '94, you can trust me on this, it's in the


1 record, -- 2 A: Okay. 3 Q: -- you'll find reference to MNR 4 employees though they're not identified by name in May 5 '94; of course? 6 A: Okay. 7 Q: Is it consistent with your memory that 8 the training of police and MNR officials happened at the 9 same time and together? 10 A: No, it's not consistent with my memory 11 and I don't recollect them being there and I'm sure they 12 were because they're -- they're on here. 13 Q: It would be the same training, for 14 example, if you flipped back four (4) pages, and remember 15 I talked about '94, let me help you, this is very 16 difficult, but if you flip back four (4) pages you'll see 17 a March '95 cover letter with these attendance records. 18 If you get there I can then get you to 19 the -- 20 A: Where are you again, sir? 21 Q: -- March '95, letter from Bouwman. It 22 encloses -- it talks about the training course. It 23 announces the training course -- 24 A: Okay. Yeah. 25 Q: -- and when it's going to happen? You


1 have that? 2 A: That's -- sorry, March 29, '95? 3 Q: That's right. 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: Now, if you flip before that you'll 6 see, for example, June 14th, '94 -- 7 A: Before that? 8 Q: Yes. That Wade Lacroix gets the 9 training from Petrolia, right? 10 A: Where are you in the -- 11 Q: Two (2) -- two (2) attendance 12 records -- 13 A: Okay, yeah. Yeah. 14 Q: You see Wade Lacroix? 15 A: No, but I'm sure he's in here 16 somewhere. 17 Q: Right. If you flip three (3) pages 18 back you'll see that MNR is identified simply by reference 19 to "MNR Pinery Ipperwash three (3)" in brackets? 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: If I could just have that page put in 22 front of the Witness? You see that? 23 A: Yeah. 24 Q: And could you put that in front of the 25 Commissioner, please.


1 So in June of 1994 and in May of 1995 MNR 2 officials were being trained in police operations and how 3 to handle Ipperwash West; correct? 4 A: Well, sir, you know, I'm going to try 5 and be helpful here because I haven't seen this in ten 6 (10) years. But there is -- let's go to, to answer your 7 question, April 20th, 1995, the memorandum that starts -- 8 and this is part of the training package. And I think it 9 is because it's hard to tell, but it would appear that 10 we're talking about -- 11 Q: West Ipperwash Beach. 12 A: -- policy -- policy regarding the 13 handling of occurrences on CFB Ipperwash and West 14 Ipperwash Beach. 15 Q: That's right. 16 A: And then there goes into policy with 17 regards to CFB Ipperwash and West Ipperwash Beach. 18 Q: And just so you know, and for the 19 record, a similar cover letter that talks about the 20 training is done by Lacroix -- 21 A: Okay. 22 Q: -- in the previous year -- 23 A: Right. 24 Q: -- and basically the same idea, the 25 same course is given two (2) years in a row, right?


1 A: Yeah. Looks -- yeah. Yeah. 2 Q: Okay. And you can't assist me now on 3 what thinking went into training MNR officials along with 4 police officers in police operations as they related to 5 CFB or Ipperwash -- 6 A: No. 7 Q: -- West? 8 A: No. I can't help you. Sorry. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm just checking my 13 notes to wrap up, Mr. Commissioner. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 17 Q: The evidence that I indent to put to 18 Wade Lacroix and has been produced by way of a transcript 19 indicates that on or about September 7th, 1995 Mr. 20 Lacroix, in the company of other officers, including 21 Kenneth Deane, made a telephone call to a police officer 22 and, among other things, inquired as to the results of the 23 autopsy? 24 A: September 7th? 25 Q: Yes.


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: First of all, you would have received 3 notice on that because it was provided to you; did you get 4 a chance to look at that transcript? 5 A: Yeah. I -- yeah. Yeah. 6 Q: Wade Lacroix was a subject officer; 7 correct? 8 A: Yeah. 9 Q: He discharged his firearm and as of 10 September 7th, 1995 no one knew whose bullets were in 11 Dudley George? 12 A: I -- I don't know. 13 Q: I'm going to suggest to you that if 14 you -- 15 A: I didn't know. 16 Q: Did you know that -- did you know that 17 -- that whose bullets were in Dudley George -- 18 A: At what -- 19 Q: -- as of September 7th, 1995? 20 A: As of this -- what time was this 21 conversation, sir, if you could help me? 22 Q: The conversation that Mr. Lacroix 23 participates in... 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)


1 2 A: Maybe I have it. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not sure 4 why you're asking this Witness these questions. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I'll get -- 6 I'll explain it in a second. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: Conversation Mr. Lacroix participates 10 in is on September 7th, 1995 at 18:45 hours. 11 A: 18:45, okay. 12 Q: Now, you'd agree with me that you 13 remained a key player in terms of managing -- you dealt 14 with Parkin over responding on what information Parkin 15 needed the night of September 6th into the morning hours 16 of September 7th, '95, right? 17 A: Right, yeah. 18 Q: You continued to assist in managing 19 the incident on September 7th, 1995, correct? 20 A: No. That's September 7th? I guess 21 the early morn -- no. 22 Wait a minute, sorry. It's just -- 23 Q: You got some sleep at some point? 24 A: September 7th is the -- the early 25 morning. Yeah, I would have had something to do with it


1 early and then by five o'clock, I'm off and -- to do the 2 injunction and I really don't have anything to do with 3 that again. 4 Q: September 8th, 9th and 10th, 1995, you 5 had nothing to do with the Ipperwash matter? 6 A: No, I have some notes about that, but 7 actually I think the next two (2) days I'm off. 8 Q: Okay. And then after that? 9 A: Some time after that I come back and 10 then there's a -- the -- Forest is a completely different 11 situation. 12 Q: Mr. Lacroix indicates in his statement 13 that's Exhibit P-1153, that he was at the Command Post 14 'til 2:00 in the morning on the night of September 6th and 15 the early morning hours of September 7th; that is, he was 16 there 'til 2:00 a.m. and then he went home. 17 Is that consistent with your memory? 18 A: I don't take issue. I remember I saw 19 him after -- I've lost track of time. 20 Q: Do you recall giving him any 21 instructions or talking to him as a subject officer, about 22 what he should or shouldn't do or shouldn't think about? 23 A: No. Linton was looking after that, 24 Inspector Linton. I had never been involved in a shooting 25 and I knew SIU was coming -- this was all new to me.


1 That was beyond my scope. 2 Q: You're a serious criminal 3 investigator, that's -- 4 A: Yeah. 5 Q: -- what you do, serious crime. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 7 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: One (1) of the people you're 11 investigating calls you up and says, before I give a 12 statement, right, 'cause Lacroix gives a statement 13 September 8th. 14 A: Okay. 15 Q: Before I give a statement about the 16 homicide I may or may not have been involved in, can I see 17 the autopsy report. 18 A: He -- 19 Q: He didn't -- 20 A: -- he says that to me? 21 Q: No, it's a hypothetical. 22 A: Okay, okay. 23 Q: Do you, (a), give him the autopsy 24 report or do you (b) not give it to him. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's a


1 hypothetical. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Which is an 3 appropriate one. He -- 4 OBJ MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 5 object to this question. In the first place, the 6 hypothetical is inane and in the second place, it's not 7 going to assist you at all and in the third place, this 8 Inspector was not on duty at the time of this -- of the 9 call -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a -- 11 MS. KAREN JONES: And he's not involved 12 with the matter. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Please, Mr. 14 Falconer -- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I can rephrase 16 it. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're at the 18 end of a long day -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- and this 21 is so remote and so removed, and so unrelated to this 22 Witness, I wish you would move on. 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 25 Q: Did Staff Sergeant Lacroix inquire of


1 you what the autopsy results were? 2 A: No, I don't even remember that when I 3 saw Wade again, was so -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He didn't, 5 so -- 6 THE WITNESS: -- it was a while. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's it, 8 move on. 9 10 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 11 Q: Can you fathom or do you know -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 13 Falconer -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- any further 15 calls -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm asking 17 you, Mr. Falconer. Perhaps you're not hearing me. You 18 try to wind this down. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I am. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't see 21 that, I don't see that at all. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That was -- this is 23 the last question in this area. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: This is your 25 last question?


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: In this area, and 2 then I'm -- then I'm -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 4 finished, then? 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, okay. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 9 Q: Do you know of any protocol that would 10 permit a subject officer, prior to giving a statement, to 11 get access to the autopsy report on the injuries to the 12 person who died? 13 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, in the 14 first place, I don't know that Mr. Falconer has properly 15 characterized Officer Lacroix as a subject officer -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 17 if -- 18 MS. KAREN JONES: In the second place -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I was -- 20 MS. KAREN JONES: -- again this is 21 completely unrelated to this Witness. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That was -- that was 23 his evidence. Mark Wright, a second testified that he was 24 the subject officer. Of course he was -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: He discharged his 2 weapon and no one knew -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You said you 4 were on your last question. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I was. It's been 6 objected to, and I'm responding -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Now, you -- 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- to the objection. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What's the 10 question again? Does he -- 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: Do you know of any protocol that would 14 permit a subject officer, prior to giving a statement, 15 either to the OPP or to SIU -- 16 A: Wait a minute, you're -- 17 Q: -- to -- 18 A: Do I know of any protocol? 19 Q: Yes. That would permit a subject 20 officer -- 21 A: A subject officer. 22 Q: Prior -- in a homicide investigation, 23 prior to giving a statement, to get access to the results 24 of the autopsy report? 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Stop. That's


1 the question? 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you have 4 an answer? Do you know of any protocol? 5 THE WITNESS: I don't know of any 6 protocol. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's the 8 answer. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 11 very much. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Those are my -- oh, 13 and by the way, I'm right. The nickname for Ken Deane is 14 Tex, right? 15 THE WITNESS: Was. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Was. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But that's 18 already been established. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, fair enough. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Long ago. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Those are my 24 questions, thank you, Mr. -- 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Commissioner, before


1 Mr. Falconer sits down, with respect to Exhibit P-1156, 2 that was played for this Witness, Constable Sean Evans 3 who's assisted the Commission with the transcripts before 4 has listened to the first part of this transcript and the 5 conversation actually goes like this -- talking about the 6 Batmobile. 7 "KOROSEC: It was stuck in the sand on 8 the Beach near Port Franks. 9 WRIGHT: (Inaudible) Information, 10 (inaudible). 11 GRAHAM: Oh yeah. 12 KOROSEC: What's that? 13 WRIGHT: Are they cleared for that 14 information? 15 KOROSEC: He's in a permanent cone of 16 silence so it's okay and ah --" 17 The question from Wright was "are they 18 cleared for that information?". 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you for that-- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much. Thank you. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- clarification. 23 Of course, for the record, I didn't know about that. 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I'm not suggesting Mr. 25 Falconer knew that at all. I'm just making --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I understand. 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Clearing it up. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you for that. 4 THE WITNESS: So was it "cone". 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It turned out to be 6 "cone". 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: "Cone". 8 THE WITNESS: Yeah, okay. I just wanted 9 to... 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: Out of curiosity that doesn't change 13 any of your answers -- 14 A: No. 15 Q: --that I asked you about a code of 16 silence or loyalty to your officers or anything else? 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You operated 18 on the assumption that it was "code". Now, let's carry 19 on. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 22 finished. You can sit down now, Mr. Falconer. I know 23 it's difficult for you to do. But you can do it now -- 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Oh, it's just 25 torture. It's torturous.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- thank you 2 very much. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I appreciate your 4 patience, Mr. Commissioner, and your humour. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We're not 6 finished yet. We still have to hear from Mr. Sandler 7 because I don't want to bring Mr. Wright -- Inspector 8 Wright back. So it's late and we've got to do this. 9 Yes, Mr. Sandler...? How long do you think 10 you might be? 11 MR. MARK SANDLER: Twenty (20) minutes. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 13 We've got to finish him. 14 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm happy to finish it 15 now. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Are you okay 17 to carry on? 18 THE WITNESS: I am, Your Honour. Thank 19 you. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 21 probably the only one in the room who's okay. Go ahead. 22 23 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 24 Q: Inspector Wright, good afternoon. 25 A: Good afternoon, sir.


1 Q: Just dealing with the last matter 2 first, Exhibit 1156 is the conversation that you were 3 questioned about between Rob Graham and Stan Korosec that 4 had this reference to the permanent cone of silence. 5 And at our request Constable Evans 6 listened, as you've heard, to the conversation and tried 7 to elicit those previously undecipherable parts; all 8 right? 9 A: Right. 10 Q: And with the benefit of this 11 additional information, it appears, and again we have the 12 tape so this is subject to any dispute being taken by any 13 of the parties, it appears that -- that you have a 14 dialogue first where you're asking whether they're cleared 15 for that information and Korosec answers "he's in the 16 permanent cone of silence so it's okay". 17 And what I'm going to suggest to you, with 18 the benefit of that dialogue what appears to be happening 19 is that you're raising with Korosec whether or not the 20 person he's talking to on the other end of the line is 21 cleared to -- for a discussion of the kind of information 22 that's being discussed and the response from Korosec is 23 he, being that other officer, is "in the cone of silence" 24 in other words, he can -- he can hear this kind of 25 sensitive information; am I right?


1 A: That might be the way. I suspect what 2 it is, is that I probably knew it was Graham on the other 3 side and I was engaging in some banter and Korosec was 4 sending it through to Graham and that's all it was. It's 5 much to do about nothing. 6 I suspect I knew it was Graham and I was -- 7 I was having some fun with Rob via Stan about is he 8 cleared because, frankly, whether or not we were going to 9 take into custody the Batmobile or take the Batmobile 10 really isn't anything that is -- is, you know, secretive 11 in nature. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: So I think it was just good natured 14 fun for a moment there that's been taken out of context. 15 Q: All right. Now, I'd like to take you 16 to -- to another topic, if I may. And you were asked an 17 awful lot of questions about eight (8) occupiers, number 18 of bats, ten (10) occupiers and so on. 19 And I want to make sure and, again, because 20 it's late in the day I'm going to try to do this without 21 taking you to a series of documents. 22 But I'm going to put a proposition to you 23 at the end of it all and -- and as a result I want to make 24 sure that I understand the chronology of what was said 25 about these things, okay?


1 A: Okay. 2 Q: So what I'm going to suggest to you is 3 that what we've heard in the evidence is this that -- that 4 we've heard that you attend at the corner -- 5 A: Right. 6 Q: -- that you engage in a radio 7 transmission in which you say there were about eight (8) - 8 - up to eight (8) and you remember you were cross-examined 9 at length about that -- 10 A: Right. 11 Q: -- right? And -- and then we see a 12 reference to your conversation with John Carson that talks 13 about eight (8). 14 A: Right. 15 Q: Do you remember that? 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: And then we see at 20:49 that -- in 18 the scribe notes that you told John Carson eight (8) of 19 them, about four (4) of which have these objects. 20 A: Right. 21 Q: Right? 22 A: Right. 23 Q: So now stopping there for a moment 24 because you were asked a lot of questions about Incident 25 Commanders have to act upon accurate information and you


1 have a duty to be accurate, that based upon your testimony 2 today represents your accurate recollection of, as best 3 you can, the number of people involved and the number of 4 people holding bats am I right? 5 A: Correct. 6 Q: And that's the information that John 7 Carson if he chose to act upon would have from you am I 8 right? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: Now, the other aspect that's important 11 of course and this was put to you at some point in -- in 12 your examination or cross-examination is that it's also 13 important to the extent possible to be accurate in your 14 sworn testimony, right? 15 A: Yes. Sure. 16 Q: So you testified at the injunction 17 hearing and again I won't take you to it but all I'm to 18 suggest is if one goes through your evidence at the 19 injunction hearing you'll see at least three (3) separate 20 references in your testimony to the number eight (8) 21 describing the number of people, right? 22 A: All right. 23 Q: And again that accurately represents 24 your recollection of the number of people involved, right? 25 A: Right.


1 Q: Now, what's interesting is that you've 2 been cross-examined at some length about this number 10 3 and how -- how this number 10 arises, all right? 4 So we start from the proposition that where 5 it counts I'm going to suggest in your testimony and in 6 your conversation with John Carson before the 7 confrontation -- 8 A: Right. 9 Q: -- you get it right, right? 10 A: Right. 11 Q: Now, the ten (10), here's how we see 12 again in terms of chronology how it pops up. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner. 14 Mr. Commissioner, My Friend -- it's late in the day so 15 maybe that's part of the -- My Friend is basically 16 engaging in argument through the Witness. 17 He's -- the Witness could almost go home 18 and My Friend could make his full argument without the 19 Witness. There's no actual evidence he's eliciting he's 20 just making an argument. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I -- 22 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes? 24 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm getting to the 25 chronology.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, no. It's -- but 2 that was just -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 4 Mr. Falconer. Yes, Mr. Millar? 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I think that Mr. -- I 6 actually agree with Mr. Falconer. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I'm kind 8 of -- 9 MR. MARK SANDLER: All right. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm kind of 11 inclined to think that we've heard enough about these 12 numbers. 13 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'm -- I'm trying to do 14 it too quickly and I -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 16 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- I'm sorry. And 17 that's -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I'm not 19 sure that it's helpful, I'm really not. 20 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, this -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Even if you 22 did it slowly. 23 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, the second aspect 24 -- this was just the lead in to how the number 10 arose 25 because --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, but I'm 2 not sure that that's a very significant point at this 3 stage whether it's eight (8) or ten (10). 4 MR. MARK SANDLER: All right. If -- if 5 you don't think it's a significant point -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think we've 7 heard enough evidence on it. 8 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, you actually -- I 9 -- I -- believe that there is an explanation for where the 10 number 10 actually comes from. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Ask him. 12 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well, I'm engaged in 13 a Commissioner who doesn't want to hear any questions on 14 it -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you ask -- 16 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- and that's fine. I 17 won't ask them. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you ask 19 that question, one (1) question then maybe... 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 22 Q: Well, what I was going to do was as 23 the -- as the prelude is just advise you that we've heard 24 in the evidence that when you called into the Command 25 Centre and used the number 8 the scribe wrote it down as


1 ten (10) right? 2 A: That's the way I see it. 3 Q: You were cross-examined about that. 4 A: Yeah. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 7 8 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 9 Q: And -- and you didn't see the scribe 10 notes at that point in time of course? 11 A: Right. 12 Q: And then we see in your notes that are 13 made on the 7th and in your statement that's again made 14 after the events and after your testifying at the 15 injunction hearing a reference to eight (8) to ten (10)? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: All right. Now, can you correlate the 18 two (2) at all? 19 A: No, really, I -- I don't know where 20 that number came from. Like I said I -- it's on the tape 21 when I'm talking. It was around eight (8) people there 22 and approximately half -- four (4) of them had bats. My - 23 - my constant -- my concern was not so much the exact 24 number but in totality there were a number of individuals 25 and there was a number of criminal offences going on.


1 Q: And -- and what Commissioner Linden is 2 thinking is we've heard that a few times. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, quite a 4 few. 5 6 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 7 Q: But I'm -- but I'm -- I want to simply 8 put a suggestion and if the suggestion isn't warranted on 9 the evidence you tell me even if I'm your counsel. Okay? 10 A: I will. 11 Q: And you testified in response to Mr. 12 Millar that you used the scribe notes to some extent when 13 you were going back after the fact and doing your notes? 14 A: I did. 15 Q: And I'm wondering whether or not the 16 number 10 that appears in your notes may have come from 17 the scribe notes? 18 A: It might but I don't have a 19 recollection of that. 20 Q: Fair enough. Now, if I can take you 21 to the scribe notes and we have this indelibly memorized 22 it's at Tab 18 of the -- of the documents. 23 And if I can take you to page 78 of the 24 typewritten scribe notes for a moment. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 A: Yes, sir, I'm there. 4 Q: And you were questioned about the 5 entry, the third entry down at 21:28 hours. 6 "Mark Wright: Let's arrest all for 7 mischief that were there -- that are 8 there." 9 And it was suggested to you that -- that 10 this was an unequivocal expression or instruction on your 11 part, that all should be arrested for mischief, and 12 incompatible with the suggestion that -- that if they were 13 to run back into the Park they were just to be allowed to 14 go. 15 Do you remember that line of cross- 16 examination? 17 A: I recall, yes. 18 Q: And -- and if I can just point out, on 19 the previous page, and this is -- this is only six (6) 20 minutes earlier, we see that at the bottom of the page, 21 "WADE LACROIX: We need bold cutters -- 22 bolt cutters and fire extinguishers. 23 JOHN CARSON: If they go back into the 24 Park, let them go." 25 And how, if at all, does that relate to


1 your testimony as to what message was being communicated-- 2 A: Well -- 3 Q: -- during this period of time? 4 A: That's flowing with exactly what I 5 said, was that, you know, if they were going to go into 6 the Park, fine. 7 But if they weren't going to go into the 8 Park, then they could be arrested for, and the call I make 9 there is mischief in relation to the property. 10 Q: Now, just dealing with the entry at 11 the bottom of page 77, because here is the direction from 12 John Carson to Wade Lacroix, as it's been described both 13 by John Carson and by you: If they go into the Park, let 14 them go. 15 Is, If they go back into the Park, let them 16 go, the same as, Let's do those guys or, Let's go to war 17 with those guys? 18 A: No. 19 Q: I mean, I'm asking a rhetorical 20 question -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- here. And the question that I have 23 for you is that you've acknowledged some of the 24 unfortunate or inappropriate use of language or 25 militaristic use of language when characterizing what


1 either Korosec or yourself had -- had to say -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 3 I'm sorry -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 5 OBJ MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It takes a while to 6 get up here, so I have an objection. I apologize. It's 7 an objection with respect to the last question. 8 He didn't fairly summarize either the 9 question or the evidence. 10 The question was about the language and the 11 approach taken by this Witness, Korosec and Lacroix. What 12 he does is he quotes something Carson says, and says, 13 that's not consistent with the evidence about -- 14 MR. MARK SANDLER: Well -- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Korosec, Lacroix 16 and Wright. I'm just saying, he's got to be fair about 17 it. The questions were all posed to the efforts, 18 sentiments, and in my respectful -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- submission, 21 briefings, engaged in by those three (3), not personally. 22 MR. MARK SANDLER: And I'm getting there. 23 That's where I'm going. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, no, but --


1 MR. MARK SANDLER: If My Friend just -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 3 MR. MARK SANDLER: It's my question 4 because I haven't uttered my question yet. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: You did. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, it might be 7 helpful if -- if My Friend, and I appreciate what he's 8 trying to do, but I again agree with Mr. Falconer. 9 And I -- it would be helpful if we ask-- 10 ask the question perhaps more directly. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think what 12 he's trying to do is save time by -- 13 MR. MARK SANDLER: I am. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- doing -- 15 MR. MARK SANDLER: I'll go slower. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- doing a 17 wind-up, and I don't know if it's saving time or if it's 18 very helpful. 19 MR. MARK SANDLER: Fair enough. I'm 20 mindful of the hour and I -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, that's 22 fine. 23 MR. MARK SANDLER: And I'm trying to 24 circumvent my go slow process. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 2 Q: So you've said that -- that this line, 3 John Carson, If they go back into the Park, let them go, 4 is not the same as doing those guys or going to war. 5 And the question that I have for you is: I 6 want to ask about your level of confidence as to whether 7 Wade Lacroix would act upon directions from John Carson 8 when uttered, If they go back into the Park, let them go? 9 A: He understood exactly what his -- what 10 that meant, in my -- 11 Q: Did you have any concerns then, or 12 now, based upon the whole cross-ex -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The question begged 16 the answer and the answer actually came out. He asked a 17 question designed to elicit from this Witness what Wade 18 Lacroix was thinking, not what might have been admissible 19 evidence on his experience with Wade Lacroix, and 20 naturally what does the Witness say: Wade Lacroix 21 understood the following. 22 Well, that, with respect, is completely 23 inadmissible. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think you 25 may be right.


1 MR. MARK SANDLER: I asked whether he 2 has -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think you-- 4 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- confidence -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And that part 6 is fine, but I think the other -- 7 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The part about -- Mr. 8 Falconer's right about this again. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Mr. -- the part about 11 does he have confidence in -- in Wade Lacroix, I think is 12 -- is a fair question. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, then -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But the 16 second part wasn't. 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: But he can't tell us 18 what was in the mind of Wade Lacroix. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, I think 20 that's what he -- what -- 21 MR. MARK SANDLER: I didn't ask him. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It may not be 23 what you intended but -- 24 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, no, actually the 25 question came out that way.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- but that's 2 what happened. 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Actually it did. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's what 5 happened. 6 MR. MARK SANDLER: This is the problem 7 with going last at the end of testimony that started -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: At the end of 9 the day -- 10 MR. MARK SANDLER: -- on February the 21st. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 13 Q: As a result of anything that you heard 14 or saw, did you have any concern John Carson gave that 15 instruction to Wade Lacroix that he would not follow it? 16 A: It was clear to me that he was going 17 to and he did, from my -- from listening to the logger 18 tapes, when Lacroix went to the fence and Carson told him 19 to move back, and he moved back. 20 Q: Now, you were asked some questions 21 some time ago about the t-shirts and mugs, and that you'd 22 indicated in connection with the mugs that you were 23 embarrassed by the fact that it -- that it only dawned on 24 you afterwards they were inappropriate. 25 A: Right.


1 Q: Do you remember that testimony? 2 A: Yeah, yeah. 3 Q: And you were also asked about -- in 4 connection with the t-shirts, that in conjunctions with a 5 First Nations Officer, you were spoken to by one of the 6 people participating in the t-shirts and you acknowledged 7 that that officer would have taken what you said as -- and 8 what the First Nations Officer said as being acceptable of 9 that logo. 10 A: Right. 11 Q: And I want to ask the same question 12 that was asked of you by Mr. Millar in connection with the 13 mugs, but not the t-shirts. 14 How do you feel about that now? 15 A: With respect to the mugs? 16 Q: To the t-shirts? 17 A: Yeah, same thing. I mean, once I 18 became aware, I remember it was at home and I took some 19 varsol, and I poured the varsol over the logo and threw 20 the shirt out. 21 Q: All right. Now, you testified in 22 response to questions from various cross-examiners that 23 you did not regard your decision to hold back the ERT team 24 as an irreversible decision to be sending CMU down the 25 road or creating a momentum.


1 And you remember that line of cross- 2 examination? 3 A: Absolutely. 4 Q: And in responding to them you said 5 that you were doing the same thing that John Carson did 6 the previous day at 7:00 a.m. when he held back the night 7 shift ERT for the morning? 8 A: Yeah, it wouldn't be the previous day, 9 it would be that morning. 10 Q: That morning -- 11 A: September 6th. 12 Q: And if I can just take you to page 48 13 of the scribe notes. 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: At 7:14 a.m.? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And is there an entry there that 18 relates to your testimony in that regard? 19 A: There certainly is. It says: 20 "Mark Wright to John Carson explained 21 map and picnic tables blocked the end of 22 Army Camp Road. Mark Wright assigned to 23 attend scene and video the scene and 24 return. Keep one (1) and two (2) ERT on 25 standby."


1 Q: And who gave the direction to keep one 2 (1) and two (2) ERT on standby? 3 A: John Carson. 4 Q: And is that the parallel that you drew 5 between engaging in the same conduct that was approved and 6 directed by John Carson and what you did in his absence -- 7 A: Absolutely -- 8 Q: -- that evening, the evening of the 9 6th? 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That question just 11 raised three (3) or four (4) different questions which of 12 course the Witness, questioned by his lawyer -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- agreed with. But, 15 prove, directed, consistent with -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- there was three 18 (3) -- 19 MR. MARK SANDLER: All right. Fine. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- or four (4) 21 different things going on. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 24 Q: All right. Did John Carson direct the 25 prior holding back of one (1) and two (2) ERT teams?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: Did he approve of it by directing it? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And is that the parallel that you were 5 describing in your testimony in response to cross- 6 examination? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: All right. Excuse me for a moment. 9 10 (BRIEF PAUSE) 11 12 Q: Now, if I can show you a document 13 which is the statement of Leo Weverink, and provide one of 14 these to the Commissioner and one (1) to you. And this is 15 document number 1004957. 16 A: Thanks. Yes, sir. 17 Q: Now you recall that the evidence of 18 Officer Spencer, as contained in his statement, was read 19 out to you in cross-examination by Mr. Scullion. 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And I can tell you that I expect the 22 evidence is that Leo Weverink accompanied Officer Spencer, 23 all right? 24 A: Okay. 25 Q: And I'm just interested in one item


1 here for the sake of completeness, and you'll see that in 2 this interview that took place on September the 8th of 3 1995, we see -- excuse me for a moment, that here's 4 Officer Weverink on the first page saying: 5 "I started my shift at 6:00. At 7:10 6 myself and Constable Spencer were 7 assigned to Checkpoint B along with two 8 (2) other officers from 3 District ERT. 9 We alternated between Checkpoint B and a 10 beach patrol up to the Park. The last 11 couple of hours of my shift, which would 12 have been to 7:30 p.m., were primarily 13 stationary patrol of the beach front at 14 the perimeter of the Park. 15 On completion of our shift, we went up 16 the roadway towards Checkpoint A. We 17 observed several younger males with 18 large sticks and bats standing near the 19 roadway. 20 It appeared that they were about to be 21 involved in some sort of activity. This 22 was reported back to the tactical 23 operational centre." 24 And again, you recall you were questioned, 25 and I'm not going to take you to the evidence of the First


1 Nations witnesses, where there were acknowledgements about 2 bats and being out in the roadway and so on, that will be 3 argument, but what I simply want to ask you here is that, 4 here was an officer that expressed the opinion that it 5 appeared: 6 "There were several larger males with 7 large sticks and bats standing near the 8 roadway. It appeared that they were 9 about to be involved in some sort of 10 activity." 11 And again, did that correspond to your 12 opinion when you confronted the officers at the corner 13 that day? 14 A: Sure. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Did you say 16 the larger males? 17 THE WITNESS: Younger. 18 MR. MARK SANDLER: Younger, I'm sorry. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Younger. 20 THE WITNESS: Yeah. 21 MR. MARK SANDLER: If I did -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I think 23 you said larger and I -- 24 MR. MARK SANDLER: Thank you. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I read


1 younger. 2 MR. MARK SANDLER: And if this statement 3 could be the next exhibit, please. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 5 THE REGISTRAR: P-1158, Your Honour. 6 7 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1158: Document Number 1004957. 8 Statement of Senior Constable 9 Leo Weverink OPP September 08, 10 1995. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 13 Q: Now, you'll be delighted to hear that, 14 subject to one omnibus question, I'm done, and that is 15 this: Inspector, you've testified evidence commencing on 16 February the 21st and you've -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Seven (7) 18 days. 19 20 CONTINUED BY MR. MARK SANDLER: 21 Q: Seven (7) days, for some time. Are 22 there any other comments or observations that you'd like 23 to make, before concluding your examination? 24 A: No. 25 Q: All right. Thank you.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 2 very much, Mr. Sandler. 3 Mr. Millar, do you have any questions? 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I have no questions for 5 Inspector Wright. I would like to, as we've done with all 6 our witnesses, thank Inspector Wright for attending and 7 giving his evidence. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'd like to 9 echo that, Inspector Wright. 10 11 THE WITNESS: You're welcome. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you for 13 coming and giving us the benefit of your evidence. 14 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And it's been 16 a long time and you're finished now, and so are we, for 17 the day. 18 We will reconvene tomorrow morning at nine 19 o'clock. 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes, and we have 21 Constable George Speck will be -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Will start? 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Start tomorrow morning 24 at nine o'clock. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you


1 very much, thank you. Thank you, everybody. 2 3 (WITNESS STANDS DOWN) 4 5 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 6 adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday March the 22nd, at 7 9:00 a.m. 8 9 --- Upon adjourning at 5:38 p.m. 10 11 12 13 14 Certified Correct, 15 16 17 18 _________________ 19 Carol Geehan, Ms. 20 21 22 23 24 25