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 May 15th, 2006 25


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


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


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


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


1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 List of Exhibits 8 4 Opening Comments 9 5 6 GEORGE EDWARD HEBBLETHWAITE, Resumed 7 Continued Examination-In-Chief by Ms. Susan Vella 29 8 Cross-Examination by Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson 31 9 Cross-Examination by Mr. Julian Falconer 44 10 Cross-Examination by Mr. Peter Rosenthal 170 11 Cross-Examination by Mr. Anthony Ross 217 12 Cross-Examination by Mr. Jonathan George 245 13 Cross-Examination by Mr. Basil Alexander 263 14 Cross-Examination by Ms. Karen Jones 272 15 16 17 Certificate of Transcript 294 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 2 EXHIBITS 3 No. Description Page 4 P-1497 T-shirt marked, "Project Maple 5 '95-ERT". 148 6 P-1498 Reserved. 150 7 P-1499 Document Number 1004489. Affidavit 8 of Ron Piers, September 02, 1998; and 9 information on George Hebblethwaite, 10 October 05, 1997; October 05, 1997. 206 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25


1 --- Upon commencing at 10:08 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. Good morning. 8 9 GEORGE EDWARD HEBBLETHWAITE, Resumed 10 11 THE WITNESS: Good morning, sir. 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Good morning, 13 Commissioner. Before we begin there's a matter that we 14 need to address and the matter is a motion that was 15 delivered yesterday -- yesterday around noon by Mr. 16 Falconer on behalf of his client and Mr. Rosenthal as 17 well, on behalf of the joint motion and it's supported by 18 the other First Nations parties. 19 The issue is simply the scheduling of the 20 motion and Mr. Falconer provided -- sent out an e-mail on 21 Saturday saying that a motion was coming. And Mr. Roland 22 on behalf of the OPP responded that he -- OPPA, excuse 23 me, he could be here Tuesday afternoon or Wednesday but 24 he could not be here this morning. 25 Mr. Falconer cannot be here tomorrow,


1 Wednesday or Thursday and as the scheduling of these 2 motions are within your absolute discretion, we need to 3 simply, and without taking too much time this morning, 4 deal with the scheduling. 5 I had originally proposed that that be 6 done in writing. This morning I proposed it to Mr. 7 Rosenthal and Mr. Falconer that the moving parties would 8 deliver their material by Tuesday at 5:00, the responding 9 parties Thursday at noon and the reply by Friday at noon. 10 And Mr. Falconer said that that's not do -- doable for 11 logistics reasons. 12 The -- another alternative would be to 13 have the moving parties deliver material in writing by 14 Tuesday, May 23rd at 5:00, the responding parties 15 Thursday, May 25th at noon and the reply Friday at noon 16 and all electronically. That's a second possibility. 17 A third possibility would be to have oral 18 argument on Friday or some other day next week at the end 19 of the day and I don't know if Friday's possible from Mr. 20 Roland or Mr. Sandler or -- or Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson's 21 point of view, but those appear to be the three (3) -- 22 they're really -- we're back to either we do it in 23 writing next week; do it Friday or some day at the end of 24 the day next week. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Next week.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I note Mr. 2 Falconer simply wants to address it. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 4 Yes, Mr. Falconer...? 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Good morning, Mr. 6 Commissioner. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 8 morning. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'll be brief. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 11 morning. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Good morning. Mr. 13 Commissioner, I've asked Mr. Clerk to place before you 14 the Motion -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I have 16 it here. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- which you have 18 in front of you and I'd simply to ask file it at this 19 stage. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. Mr. 22 Commissioner, in terms of the process the concern I have 23 is frankly one of substance and one of logistics for 24 Counsel, so I want to deal with substance first. 25 This Motion as you can see from the face


1 of it is a motion to seek an order in respect of the OPP 2 to ask them to order their officers to preserve any 3 memorabilia they have; 1). 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2) to surrender any 6 memorabilia they have. And it's to order all of their 7 officers who might have such memorabilia that are under 8 their employ, so it's not just with respect to witnesses. 9 Secondly -- and I'm only indicating what 10 it is so that I can address why I say it's urgent to deal 11 with it. 12 Secondly you'll see a -- I don't know if 13 you have the Motion in front of you, you'll see from the 14 -- the Motion that we also seek an order in respect of 15 the OPPA in which we seek to have them direct -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- their members 18 not by way of order but way of notice to their membership 19 as to their responsibilities as a party pursuant to the 20 rules of procedure and practice of the Commission. So 21 it's a different type of order we seek against the OPPA 22 than the OPP keeping in mind who has authority and in 23 which regard. 24 There is additional relief that doesn't 25 have the same level of urgency and that's why I'm trying


1 to explain this. There's additional relief that we say 2 is important in terms of the process which is to provide 3 unedited version of -- of the discipline records -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- especially in 6 respect of the investigation and discipline apparatus 7 that took place in this process with respect to what we 8 say an argue -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- are racist 11 paraphernalia or racist memorabilia that the OPP 12 maintained following the Ipperwash matter; that is we say 13 that there is now enough evidence to justify -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- having that 16 level of transparency that these names of the persons -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- who did the 19 investigation, formally or informally, should be 20 released. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Now, I'm not going 23 into the grounds at this stage, I'm simply setting out 24 the -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, I


1 understand that, Mr. Falconer. I just want to deal with 2 the scheduling issue at this point. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay. That's 4 right. Now, the reason I say with great respect that 5 this is a matter that has some urgency is that we are now 6 at a stage where we have heard -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 8 Falconer, I'm prepared to accept that we have to deal 9 with it expeditiously. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I've 12 heard the options and I'd like to discuss which and how 13 we deal with it. 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Okay. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'd like to 16 deal with it expeditiously. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You don't 19 need to persuade me that we should -- 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- deal with 22 it expeditiously. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So let's 25 just figure out when we can.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. And -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We can't do 3 it this morning obviously. Mr. Rosenthal -- 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I was about 5 to address that. I thought -- I'm sorry. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I had 7 the impression that you had agreed that it would be 8 either in writing this week or orally next Friday. 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No -- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We haven't 11 got agreement on that? 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: No, Mr. Falconer had 13 suggested and I didn't go -- didn't discuss this with 14 you. Mr. Falconer had suggested that he make his 15 submissions this morning in the absence of Mr. Roland and 16 then that Mr. Roland would then respond. 17 I had responded to Mr. Falconer that I 18 don't think that Mr. Falconer would like to have 19 submissions made with respect to a Motion being brought 20 against his client when he wasn't there. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Not the one 22 that was served on a Sunday and argued on Monday morning. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's just 25 not fair, Mr. Falconer.


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And so -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not 3 prepared to do that. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- I just don't think 5 that's a reasonable alternative. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not 7 prepared to do that, so I don't even want to hear you, 8 because on it's face it's not fair to receive a Motion on 9 Sunday evening, argue it on Monday morning in the absence 10 of opposition counsel. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I -- I think it's 12 somewhat unfortunate the way this is developing, because 13 what's just happened is that you've interpreted what Mr. 14 Millar told you about my position and then you've told me 15 that my position isn't fair. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I have? 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I would like to be 18 able to -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, I'm 20 sorry. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's all right. I 22 would like to be able to actually say what my position 23 is. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I just don't 25 want to hear the substantive argument, just the argument


1 with respect to when -- 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I -- it's about 3 scheduling. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- we hear 5 it. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: You'll be hearing 7 about scheduling. Mr. Millar's quite right, I made the 8 suggestion to him as between us about that. That wasn't 9 the suggestion I was going to make to you this morning. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. What 11 suggestion were you going to make? 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: As Mr. Millar's 13 response to me made some sense to me so I wasn't going to 14 raise that again; that is Mr. Millar's right. I wouldn't 15 want to have someone arguing for relief against my client 16 with me not here. So -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So is there 18 another alternative that you're proposing? 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Although I want to 22 emphasise we should have the greatest of respect for Ms. 23 Jones. She is here on behalf of the OPP. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And we shouldn't


1 act like counsel's not here for the OPP. 2 But I hear the issue and that's very fair. 3 But here -- here's the point as a result of Mr. Millar's 4 response to that I've come to. 5 First of all, it is important; the context 6 of this is important. There were revelations on May 7 11th, that being Thursday, in which you heard on the 8 record some of the concerns or -- or intended steps to be 9 taken by the Ontario Provincial Police; that is, you 10 heard that from Ms. Tuck-Jackson on the record on 11 Thursday that there was a clear opportunity for Ms. Tuck- 12 Jackson on behalf of the OPP to put their position on the 13 record; how they felt about the revelation and what they 14 were going to do. 15 And I just want to point that out that 16 happened; I've read the -- I've read the transcript. 17 Secondly, I understand the concern and 18 what I would say is this. By virtue of the seeking of 19 remedies, 1) in respect of the OPP and 2), in respect of 20 the OPPA and 3) in respect of the editing of the records 21 there is one aspect of this motion that could most 22 certainly be heard this morning without, in fact, being 23 relief being sought against Mr. Roland's client and that 24 relates to the relief we seek in respect of the OPP which 25 is pure and simple.


1 And the OPP may well after we're finished 2 our submission this morning, not even object to making 3 the order. 4 And it's certainly not relief we're 5 seeking against the OPPA. I simply want to argue that 6 part of the Motion in which -- of course, Ms. Jones is 7 here anyway but I want to argue that part of the Motion 8 in which we seek to have the OPP issue an order in 9 respect of their members to preserve and surrender the 10 memorabilia. 11 As I said, this is with respect to the 12 OPP, Ms. Tuck-Jackson's client. And it may well be once 13 my -- no more than twenty (20) minute submission is done, 14 Ms. Tuck-Jackson well agree on behalf of her client. And 15 it may be that Mr. Roland should still be able to make 16 submissions about whether that order should be made. 17 But it's not relief I'm seeking against 18 the OPPA. I just want to make that clear that it's 19 capably -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- being parsed 22 that way so that's my first effort. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I 24 appreciate -- 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And -- and I don't


1 -- I -- you've heard me on that request and perhaps you 2 know what you want to do or you don't know what you want 3 to do with that request but I'm asking to at least being 4 able to argue that part this morning. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 6 And are you going to deal with the other -- the options 7 of which way we deal with the whole Motion? 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: In terms of -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Whether you 10 prefer to do it in writing this week or next week or 11 orally -- 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Part of it depends 13 on whether we can go ahead with that first part with 14 respect to the OPP this morning. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well my 16 preference is not to split it. My preference -- 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- is to 19 hear the whole Motion at one time. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. Fair 21 enough. 22 Then the -- then the second issue is this. 23 It is imperative to my client that we be heard on the 24 record orally on the issue. I don't believe -- between 25 Mr. Rosenthal and I, we have estimated our argument to be


1 forty-five (45) minutes long. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Each or 3 combined? 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Combined. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes -- 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thirty (30) minutes 7 for me, fifteen (15) minutes for Mr. Rosenthal. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I do not believe 10 that that necessitates the -- the necessity of written 11 submissions. 12 Secondly, we should be heard on the record 13 about these issues just as the OPP was heard last 14 Thursday. Obviously we didn't know it was coming and we'd 15 like that opportunity to put our position on the record 16 because there's no question that this Notice of Motion is 17 responsive to -- it is responsive to the -- the 18 revelation of May 11th about the t-shirt. 19 The Motion is definitely responsive to 20 that and we're trying to do this in an orderly way. And 21 we do want to be heard on the record about it and we're - 22 - and we're trying not to just pop up and talk. 23 So that -- so we say forty-five (45) 24 minutes should be found. If it can't be found this 25 morning because of the logistics, then my respectful


1 submission is, I have to speak to Mr. Rosenthal, but I 2 believe he's available next Monday as am I and we'd all 3 be here anyway. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That is the whole -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I would do 6 it on Friday. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Oh, I'm sorry next 8 -- next Tuesday. Well, I'm saying Friday we're not here. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, Friday. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's my only 11 concern. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, next 13 Friday. We're talking about next Friday. We're talking 14 about a week from Friday. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, then my -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I 17 understand you can't be here this -- 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- respectful 19 submission, the earlier -- the earlier to do it would be 20 at the end of the court day on Tuesday, which is in my 21 submission's going to be earlier, we'll all be here 22 anyway. We -- it's not going to take long. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I -- 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: You could 25 probably --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- prepared 2 to consider that. I'm prepared to consider that. I'm 3 prepared to consider a time other than on Friday, but 4 certainly not this week. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: So the first 6 available opportunity in my respectful submission by -- 7 by doing it next Tuesday, it's the first available 8 opportunity that the counsel can be here. We do it at 9 the end of the day so it doesn't interfere with the 10 evidence and we address it. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Right. All 12 right. I'm not going to spend much more time -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Sure. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- trying to 15 figure when we can do this. We can find if the hall's 16 available. We can find other counsellors availability 17 and so on. But some time next week; I understand the 18 preferred date is Friday. If that doesn't work, then 19 perhaps after -- 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I'm not certain I -- 21 the date that I -- I would suggest -- I was talking 22 actually about this Friday -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You weren't 24 sure the hall was available? 25 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And Kimble Hall, I've


1 now been advised, is available this Friday. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We don't 3 know about next Friday? 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Don't know about next 5 Friday but I don't know about the availability of -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you 7 don't know about the availability later on, into the 8 evening and all that? 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, I think that I 10 can ascertain the availability next Tuesday, this 11 morning. And -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If it works 13 and if it works for other -- 14 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- and we can -- we 15 can look at that for -- I presume it would be available 16 next Tuesday during the night because we're here until 17 5:30 in any event -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 19 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- and it's set up. 20 So, I -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 22 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- will -- I will just 23 double check that, Commissioner, about next Tuesday. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you need 25 to check with counsel, too, to make sure that --


1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well I -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- if it 3 were Tuesday, that would be suitable. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well -- but by this, 5 I'm asking Ms. Jones and Ms. Tuck-Jackson to advise us as 6 soon as possible this morning -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And we'll 8 make it -- 9 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- about next Tuesday. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 11 And Mr. Rosenthal...? 12 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Thank you. Good 13 morning, Mr. Commissioner. Just one other small point 14 here. I understand the scheduling problem and I'm happy 15 to try to accommodate whatever other counsel would find 16 suitable. 17 But part of the Motion is that the OPP 18 order that all officers preserve these memorabilia as 19 well as surrender them. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 21 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And I wonder if Ms. 22 Tuck-Jackson would be prepared to give us the assurance, 23 in light of the fact that she said on the record that 24 there was an investigation to be undertaken by the OPP, 25 give us the assurance at least that there would be an


1 order now -- 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 3 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- that officers 4 preserve these documents. We already had one (1) officer 5 who said that in light of his upcoming testimony here, 6 his wife suggested maybe he should destroy it and he 7 destroyed it -- 8 MR. DERRY MILLAR: But that's not -- 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: So -- 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- that's not fair. 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Well, it -- 12 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That's simply not 13 fair. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I think that's a 15 fair -- and I think that's a fair summary of Sergeant 16 Graham. But in any event, not to belabour the -- that 17 point, but there is certainly the possibility of people 18 destroying evidence between now and whenever we argue the 19 Motion -- 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 21 think -- 22 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: And so at least -- 23 at least the preservation order, I would request Ms. 24 Tuck-Jackson to tell us that that has already been done 25 or will be done.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 2 don't know if I need to hear from here, but I don't think 3 that's a real danger at this stage. 4 MR. DERRY MILLAR: So will -- what we'll 5 do, is sort out this morning the availability of counsel 6 for next Tuesday night and the hall, but I'm certain the 7 hall will be available next Tuesday night. And then we 8 would argue it at the end of the day, subject to your 9 direction, next Tuesday night, with My Friend's forty- 10 five (45) minutes and that's a possibility. 11 Now, perhaps -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's -- 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- we could -- you 14 could, before you decide, ultimately, we could determine 15 whether or not -- about the availability, Commissioner? 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 17 that's fine. 18 Ms. Tuck-Jackson, you want to say 19 something? 20 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I do, Mr. 21 Commissioner. Good morning. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 23 morning. 24 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: First of all, 25 in response to My Friend, Mr. Falconer. I appreciate his


1 attempts to expedite this matter and I also appreciate 2 the need to do that. And in doing so, he's proposing a 3 bifurcated process. 4 In my respectful submission, I can 5 indicate that I am not in a position to proceed this 6 morning to address that aspect of the Application -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We're not 8 going to do that, Ms. Tuck-Jackson. 9 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: And the reason 10 why, frankly, also addresses My Friend, Mr. Rosenthal's 11 request before you this morning. I'm not in a position 12 to advise the Commission of our position at this time. 13 I'm awaiting instructions; I've spoken to your counsel as 14 to some of the reasons behind that, but I'm not, at this 15 point, sir, able to proceed, period. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 17 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: As for 18 scheduling and timing, if -- if Kimble Hall is available 19 this Friday, we would be able to address it at that time 20 or later on orally on Tuesday the 23rd. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 22 And I think that's sufficient for now. And now we'll 23 deal with this later on. And you've put everybody on 24 notice about where we are, so that's fine. 25 Now, let's get started with our hearing.


1 I want to continue right now. Mr. Hebblethwaite is on 2 the stand. And I understand that you have a few more 3 questions? 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Yes, there is one (1) 5 more brief area that I neglected to address with Sergeant 6 Hebblethwaite. 7 8 CONTINUED EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. SUSAN VELLA: 9 Q: Good morning. 10 A: Good morning. 11 Q: We have heard evidence that an 12 occupier's dog entered the sandy parking lot when the 13 Crowd Management Unit was present. 14 Do you have any recollection about such an 15 event? 16 A: Yes, I do. 17 Q: What is your recollection? 18 A: It was after the initial left Cover 19 Squad punchout and the time that we were backing up, and 20 during the time that the occupiers were coming over the 21 fence, but before the actual engagement of the unit, go, 22 that a black dog did come at or come towards the unit and 23 start getting in the ranks to the left. 24 And it came in front of the or in -- in 25 the area of the left Cover Squad. It came towards myself


1 and I gave it a hoof in the back end to get it away. 2 We had two (2) police dogs in behind my 3 location. Having the dog on the scene would have 4 presented a significant problem in -- in my view with 5 maintaining control of our K-9 officers' dogs and it 6 wasn't a good situation to be in, to be worried about 7 getting bitten by a dog in addition to everything else 8 that was going on. 9 Q: All right. So just to be clear this 10 was at the -- the left cover punchout had concluded, the 11 unit was backing up, and this was prior to the full 12 punchout? 13 A: Yeah. I'm -- I'm certain it happened 14 after that punchout. 15 Q: And how is it that you're so certain? 16 A: I -- I just am. We -- the fellow 17 came through the turnstile and the left cover went 18 through and the -- the left Cover Squad was -- was back 19 when the dog presented and that's -- that's my 20 recollection. I've read my -- my evidence as well in -- 21 in the transcript and that's still my belief today. 22 Q: All right. Thank you. That does 23 conclude the examination-in-chief and perhaps we will now 24 start with the cross-examinations. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.


1 Yes, Mr. Millar...? 2 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Commissioner, just 3 before we begin, just for the purposes of clarity, we are 4 sitting on Friday, May 26th, in any event -- 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- because it's a -- 7 because of the holiday -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Tuesday to 9 Friday day. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- it's Tuesday to 11 Friday. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: But -- so just to 14 clarify them. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 16 Tuck-Jackson...? 17 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Thank you, Mr. 18 Commissioner. 19 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: 21 Q: Good morning, Sergeant Hebblethwaite. 22 A: Good morning. 23 Q: As you know no doubt by now, my name 24 is Andrea Tuck-Jackson and I'm going to ask you some 25 questions on behalf of the OPP.


1 My Friend Ms. Vella asked you some 2 questions regarding your understanding of the purpose of 3 the deployment of the CMU on the night of September the 4 6th and I just want to go back to address a number of 5 issues in that regard. 6 First of all, I gather your evidence is 7 that on the night of the 6th prior to the deployment of 8 the CMU you received no indication from Inspector Carson 9 that its purpose was to serve as a diversion to position 10 the Sierra teams? 11 A: That's correct. 12 Q: And similarly you received no 13 indication from Staff Sergeant Lacroix that the purpose 14 of the deployment was to position Sierra teams? 15 A: Correct. 16 Q: And indeed as I understand it, sir, 17 that you received no indication from anyone that the 18 purpose of the deployment was to facilitate the 19 positioning of the Sierra teams? 20 A: That's correct. The first I heard of 21 that was through the Inquiry. 22 Q: Thank you. All right. Now, I can 23 tell you, sir, that Kent Skinner testified before us. 24 And the for benefit of My Friends the transcript date is 25 April the 19th. I'm referring to page 289 commencing at


1 line 3. 2 And I can tell you, sir, that he told us 3 that with respect to what was transpiring that evening he 4 was of the view that the Crowd Management Unit was not 5 serving as a supportive role for TRU because that would 6 not make sense. 7 And I trust you'd agree with that? 8 A: I agree. 9 Q: All right. We've also heard from 10 Wade Lacroix and I'm again -- for the benefit of My 11 Friends I'm referring to the May 9th, transcript. It's 12 examination by Mr. Falconer commencing at page 305 in and 13 around lines 24 and 25. 14 And I just want to read you a brief 15 passage and again confirm whether or not you would agree 16 with Mr. Lacroix's view. 17 OBJ MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, I 18 have an objection to My Friend's question. The last 19 question did not represent a fair contextualization of 20 Skinner's evidence. My Friend chose to put a snippet to 21 this Witness as to the role of CMU vis-a-vis TRU. What 22 she didn't put to the Witness by Skinner was Skinner's 23 insistence that CMU was to actually assist TRU to get TRU 24 Sierra teams in place for observation. 25 Now, it's not fair to the Witness to put a


1 small snippet where she says CMU wasn't supporting TRU, 2 but she completely leaves out the context that Skinner 3 says CMU did provide support to TRU. And we know that 4 very clear context because Ms. Tuck-Jackson tried to 5 cross-examine Mr. Skinner out of it. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 7 Ms. Tuck-Jackson, do you want to elaborate a little bit. 8 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I'm simply -- 9 I'd be happy to read the exact question and answer 10 exchange. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I thought 12 that's what you were going to do. 13 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I'll do that, 14 sir. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, but do 16 you want to put the context properly? 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I want the cont -- 18 the fact that My Friend is able to pick a single question 19 and answer is not the issue. It's whether she's put a 20 fair statement of Skinner's position on whether CMU 21 supported TRU at what stage. 22 Because she's chosen to go into this, when 23 she does she has to at least put the context fairly of 24 what Skinner says about CMU supporting TRU. 25 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: I'm going to


1 put the questions and answers. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I 3 think Mr. -- Mr. Falconer's explained the context a 4 little better in his objection. 5 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: Yes, I think he 6 has, sir. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 8 Go ahead. 9 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: But, I will 10 just for the sake of clarity and to assist the Witness, 11 I'll put the series of questions and answers to you. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MS. ANDREA TUCK JACKSON: 15 Q: Commencing at page 288, line 13. 16 "Q: That's fair. All right I take your 17 point. Once the Crowd Management Unit 18 however, has been deployed, you'd agree 19 that the Sierra teams who remain in the 20 field, they in part continue to serve a 21 role not just to inform the Incident 22 Commander, but also to provide 23 intelligence back to assist the Crowd 24 Management Unit. 25 A: Certainly.


1 Q: Right. 2 A: The information they bring back 3 would be of value for them. 4 Q: Okay. And the other supportive 5 role that they fulfilled was if 6 necessary to provide cover. 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: All right. And it's not as if the 9 Crowd Management Unit was serving any 10 supportive role of the TRU team? 11 A: No they were not. 12 Q: No that wouldn't make sense would 13 it? 14 A: No." 15 Now, having heard, sir, that exchange of 16 questions and answers, do you agree -- again, I'm drawing 17 upon your background as someone who is experienced as a 18 member of ERT, someone who has trained in ERT. 19 You'd agree with me that it doesn't make 20 sense for a Crowd Management Unit to be serving to 21 support TRU? 22 A: I agree. 23 Q: Thank you. Mr. Lacroix was also 24 questioned in the same area in the sense of the primary 25 purpose for which the Crowd Management Unit was deployed.


1 And My Friend, Mr. Falconer asked a series 2 of questions in this area and again, I'm referring to May 3 the 9th, page 305 commencing at line 20. 4 Again I'll read you the passage and I'm 5 going to ask you to comment -- comment on it. 6 "Q: And so when their unsuccessful 7 attempts to find out whether there's 8 weapons there, the idea was to put your 9 men and you halfway down the road in 10 harm's way as if it were -- does that 11 make any sense? 12 A: If -- if that -- I think I 13 answered yes in the evidence-in-chief. 14 If -- it would make no sens if that's 15 what we were, nothing but a diversion. 16 However, if we were going down to do 17 the mission that I was told to do, go 18 down and clear the Park, to use us a 19 screen of some kind, the diversion to 20 get that Sierra team into it's final 21 position, I can understand that. 22 That's just -- that's just good, you 23 know, concurrent activity. But I agree 24 if that's all I was, that's not a 25 proper use of the CMU."


1 So standing back a bit, it appears that 2 what Mr. Lacroix is saying is that he understood that his 3 primary purpose was to go down and move the people back 4 from the sandy parking lot. But if as a secondary 5 benefit of doing that, the movement would serve to 6 facilitate the positioning of the Sierra teams, well 7 that's fine and that would make good tactical sense. 8 Do you agree with that? 9 A: I would agree with that. That was 10 much of my sentiment on Thursday when I had a question 11 put to me that was similar. 12 Q: I thought that's what it was and I 13 wanted to go back just to clarify that that's what you 14 meant; that it would be a secondary benefit of moving the 15 CMU down the road, that the Sierra teams would be able to 16 get into position. 17 A: My sentiment was that. And if that 18 was the primary reason for us going down the road, that 19 was a big surprise to me based on everything that had 20 transpired right from the CP in Mount For -- or sorry, 21 Forest and then again in the MNR parking lot, the TOC 22 area, reiterating our -- our mission at that time. 23 There was no sense whatsoever that it was 24 anything but what it was. 25 Q: Exactly, sir. Thank you. All right.


1 One (1) final area. We have heard from a 2 number of officers who formed part of that Crowd 3 Management Unit is to their observations as they marched 4 down East Parkway Drive towards the parking lot, and a 5 number have indicated to us that as they approached the 6 parking lot, they were able to see individuals in that 7 parking lot and one (1) officer also mentioned that he 8 observed some of them possessing weapons; not firearms, 9 but weapons in their hands. 10 You've told us that as you marched toward 11 the parking lot, you were not or you do not rather, I 12 should say, see anybody in the parking lot. And I just 13 want to ask you some questions about your ability to see 14 that night, particularly as you are coming closer to the 15 parking lot. 16 And I wonder, sir, if you would turn to 17 your materials, Tab 19. This has been marked as Exhibit 18 P-1488 and it is the statement that you gave on September 19 the 8th, 1995. 20 A: I have it. 21 Q: And, sir, if I could ask you to turn 22 to page 6. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: And towards the bottom, you are 3 describing how, as you are coming along East Parkway 4 Drive, there are various sources of light in your eyes. 5 And I want to read, briefly, a portion of that to you. 6 Starting at the very bottom line: 7 "Spotlights were shining about. They 8 weren't on us directly just yet. You 9 could see them a little more clearly as 10 we advanced down the roadway. I 11 estimate a 150 metres; could have been 12 a little closer. I observed what could 13 have been a motorcycle or a motorized 14 tricycle or 4-wheeler, all terrain 15 style, coming down the roadway towards 16 us; single headlight bouncing as it 17 came. 18 Shortly after that or about the same 19 moment, two (2) or three (3) 20 spotlights, high intensity spotlights, 21 came on and were looking right down the 22 roadway in the path we were going into. 23 This just pooched [I guess] --" 24 A: Yeah. 25 "-- all of our night vision."


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: "It blinded you temporarily and then, 3 of course, you've got a problem on your 4 hands as far as clear seeing, unless 5 what you're looking now is nicely lit 6 up. We kept walking and advancing and 7 there was minor objects being thrown at 8 us; small rocks, stones. At least 9 that's what I felt on my screen. 10 I can't speak for everyone, but there 11 was objects being tossed at us at this 12 point. And right before I was aware of 13 it, we were suddenly at the fence 14 line." 15 Now, just picking up on that last 16 statement: 17 "Right before I was aware [that] we 18 were suddenly at the fence line." 19 I want to tie that, if I can, in part back 20 to the lights. 21 Is it fair to say, sir, that as you were 22 marching down the road and these spotlights were been 23 shone upon you, it was adversely affecting your ability 24 to see? 25 A: That's fair.


1 Q: All right. And as you've indicated 2 that suddenly, you'd reached the parking lot and I gather 3 what you're saying, sir, is that you'd had some 4 difficulty monitoring how far you were going along in 5 part because of the light? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Okay. Is it possible, sir, that you 8 ability to see clearly and accurately as to what was in 9 the parking lot as you were approaching it was adversely 10 affected by the lights that were shining in your eyes? 11 A: Partly, yes. 12 Q: Okay. Thank you, sir. Those are my 13 questions. 14 Thank you, Mr. Commissioner. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 16 Ms. Tuck-Jackson. 17 Mr. Alexander...? 18 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Mr. Commissioner, 19 for your information, in light of Mr. Falconer's 20 commitments this week and in an attempt to accommodate 21 him, I will be switching positions with Mr. Falconer for 22 this Witness. 23 So I will go at the end and Mr. Falconer 24 will take my position now. 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Fine.


1 2 (BRIEF PAUSE) 3 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've already 5 said good morning to you, Mr. Falconer, so I don't need 6 to say it again. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 12 from a time allocation point of view, to be candid, the 13 evidence that came out on Thursday was not expected. Mr. 14 Mathai did his best to approximate how long he thought he 15 would be at the back end, and with the developments that 16 came on Thursday and consultation with my client I'm 17 seeking two (2) hours. 18 I'm at the front end so areas that we 19 would have thought would be covered aren't going to be 20 covered when I'm doing my questioning so it tends to 21 prolong it a little bit. But I'm estimating about two 22 (2) hours and I'll get through it as fast as I can. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm assuming 24 that area's that you're going to cover may affect the 25 time estimates of other people. I mean, we don't know


1 that I'm hoping. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Right. And Mr. -- 3 Mathai estimated an hour to an hour and a half -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I know 5 that. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- and I'm just 7 saying two (2) hours. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And there 9 are some additional matters that have come up, and I'm 10 not surprised that you need a little more time. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Whether you 13 need two (2) full hours or not we'll see. You'll do your 14 best to keep -- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm estimating I 16 expect it could take two (2) hours; that's why I'm -- I'm 17 trying to be fair about it. I won't be more that that, 18 but that's -- looking at everything I'm -- I'm estimating 19 that. 20 21 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 22 Q: Good morning, Sergeant Hebblethwaite. 23 A: Good morning. 24 Q: My name's Julian Falconer, I act on 25 behalf of Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto.


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: Sergeant Hebblethwaite, you read out 3 a-- a prepared statement at the end of your examination- 4 in-chief. Do you recall doing that for the Commissioner? 5 A: Yes, sir, I did. 6 Q: All right. Now, the point of that 7 prepared statement was what exactly? 8 A: I understood that was an opportunity 9 for me to express personal feelings that were not 10 necessarily evidence, and to express an opinion or 11 recommendation for consideration by the Inquiry. 12 Q: Did you understand you were expected 13 to refer to facts of the encounter with the occupiers as 14 part of your statement? 15 A: I wasn't aware that -- I didn't, sir. 16 Q: You -- 17 A: I wasn't aware that I did not. 18 Q: I'm sorry, I'm a little bit confused. 19 It's not your fault. It's -- I -- I kind of phrased it 20 in the negative so it's probably made it worse. 21 Did you or did you not view part of your 22 entitlement in that prepared statement to include 23 referring to facts of your encounters with the occupiers? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: You thought you could do that?


1 A: Now, you've lost me, sir. My 2 opportunity at that point was again to express feelings 3 which obviously aren't facts, they're personal to me; to 4 summarize my feelings and -- and emotions on that date 5 and what the day meant to me now today; where I -- where 6 I saw or felt that things may have been different when I 7 made mention to the fact that in 1994 the Federal 8 Government had announced that those lands would be 9 returned to the First Nations people and here we were a 10 year or so later having this serious encounter. 11 And in my mind and I think in a lot of 12 people's minds, it was -- it wasn't necessary. It didn't 13 have to be had things moved along properly the year 14 before. 15 Q: Fair enough, but in fact do -- do you 16 have the written statement with you? 17 A: I don't, sir. 18 Q: All right. I'm going to read to you 19 what you said in addition to what you've just said, the 20 emotional side of it? Fair enough? You wanted -- you 21 wanted to bring home to the Commissioner how it 22 emotionally impacted and how you thought things could be 23 changed in the future for example the Federal Government 24 taking initiative. 25 You did talk about those two (2) things,


1 right? 2 A: Yes, sir, I did. 3 Q: But in between those two (2) things 4 you spent pages on your view of the violence of the 5 occupiers and on the intentions of the occupiers. 6 And let me give you a quote; it can be 7 found at page 293 line 3. I don't know if this 8 transcript can be put up on the screen. I'd be grateful 9 if My Friends can assist me. It's the transcript of May 10 11th, 2006, and I'm at pages 292 to 293, line 3. 11 "It was pure and simple raw violence 12 with clear intent to harm and injure as 13 many officers as possible. Any number 14 of blows could have resulted in serious 15 bodily harm or worse to the officers." 16 That's page 293. Page 292: 17 "I saw Wade Lacroix being confronted 18 and struck with such force that his 19 shield split. There was gunfire. 20 There were vehicles driving at us." 21 You said all those things? 22 A: Yes, sir, I did. 23 Q: What you don't say is that the 24 gunfire you -- the only gunfire you ever saw was gunfire 25 from police officers, right?


1 You never saw any firearm in the hands of 2 an occupier? 3 A: No, I didn't. 4 Q: Right. Well, what I want to ask you 5 is would you agree with me that you understood before you 6 ever read out this prepared statement that it was not 7 meant to put your spin of the facts; that was not what 8 the point of a prepared statement was, was it? 9 A: I would agree, sir. 10 Q: Would you also agree with me that 11 when you said that there was an extraordinary level of 12 violence, and the way you described it was... 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: I apologize, I'm at page -- for My 17 Friends' reference, I was at page 293 the last time and 18 if she goes to 293 that -- that's where I'm going to end 19 up in any event. 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: Page -- My Friends are just seeing if 24 they can get it up on the screen. I'm going to read to 25 you from page 291 while My Friends are searching. There


1 we are. 2 If you go to page 291, Ms. Vella, at line 3 6, I would appreciate it. 291, line 6. 4 "As a police officer it was the most 5 violent and dangerous experience of my 6 career before or since. To my 7 knowledge there's never been an 8 encounter like this in the history of 9 the OPP." 10 And then you went on to describe as -- as 11 you called it, the gunfire, the thuds and the thwacks of 12 officer's shields being hit. 13 Do you know how you did all that? 14 A: Yes, sir. 15 Q: Where do you refer to the 16 extraordinary multiple traumas occasion to the body of 17 Cecil Bernard George who ended up seriously injured, in 18 an ambulance and in the hospital as a result of the 19 encounter with the officers? 20 Where do you put that in your statement? 21 A: It's not there, sir. 22 Q: No. In essence, what was an 23 opportunity for you to explain an emotional experience 24 that you had and how you saw the system could be fixed in 25 the future was actually, I'm going to suggest to you,


1 taken advantage by your in order to put your spin of the 2 facts. 3 Isn't that true? 4 A: I expressed, sir, what I saw, felt 5 and heard. 6 Q: Well you -- 7 A: I lived it, sir. 8 Q: Pardon me? 9 A: I say -- I -- I lived it, I was 10 there. 11 Q: Well, just by way of notice to you 12 and your counsel I want you to know I'm going to move 13 before the Commissioner after your evidence and 14 everybody's had an opportunity to examine you, to have 15 these statements henceforth vetted by Commission counsel 16 so that we don't end up in these cross-examinations on 17 facts that are not observations. I want you to know 18 that. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't know 20 if that's a possibility, but I do think this is an 21 unfortunate development, I think, when these questions 22 are asked at the end. It's to express emotions and the 23 extent to which the witness comments on facts and puts 24 his interpretation on facts. I think it is fair game for 25 cross-examination and this is unfortunate and I hope it


1 isn't repeated again. 2 I hope when a witness is given an 3 opportunity to express his feelings and his emotions and 4 how it impacted on him, that the witness would confine 5 himself to that and we won't need to go through this. 6 But in the meantime I think it is fair 7 game for cross-examination. 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. I -- 9 I've asked the questions I needed to ask about. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 11 12 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 13 Q: Could you assist me, Sergeant 14 Hebblethwaite, in terms of your evidence, there was 15 something I was very interested in and it was some time 16 records that you had that are reflected at Tab 10 of 17 Commission counsel documents. 18 And you -- you should feel free to turn it 19 up. But the question I'm about to have may not need it. 20 But you feel free. It's your notes, Tab 10. And I 21 apologize, I don't have the exhibit number in front of 22 me. 23 But -- and specifically it's your notes 24 with respect to your -- 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Excuse me, I'm sorry,


1 it's Exhibit P-1484. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: And I appreciate My 3 Friend's assistance. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 6 Q: P-1484. And it's specifically your 7 notes of in and around 20:00 hours on September 6th, 8 1995, and I -- I'll take you very quickly to what I want 9 to ask you. 10 I notice this reference to departing from 11 the motel at 20:27 and arriving in Forest at 20:40. 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: And that was when you went to get 14 your equipment, your hard TAC. 15 A: That's correct. 16 Q: And then you return? 17 A: Yes, sir. 18 Q: And in doing so, you have not said 19 20:25 or 20:20, you have said 20:27 and then you said you 20 returned at 20:40. That's -- that's quite particular and 21 specific and I -- and I'm not challenging you on it, I 22 just to make sure you -- it sounds like you were fairly 23 confident of the times of departure and arrival. 24 A: Certainly. Yes, I -- it would appear 25 I am.


1 Q: And would you agree with me that 2 would indicate that, on the next day when you recorded 3 those times, those times were -- you made a point of 4 being very specific in -- in ascertaining times of 5 departure and arrival? 6 A: I can't be a 100 percent certain, but 7 I suspect that's the times I jotted on the dash pad of 8 the cruiser. 9 Q: Fair enough. And that's why you're 10 confident about the 20:27 time? 11 A: Yes, sir. 12 Q: Now, because I stay, as Counsel, at 13 the Oakwood hotel, I travel between Grand Bend and Forest 14 all the time and -- and I couldn't help noticing, because 15 Mr. Commissioner will tell you, I have a problem with 16 getting to Court exactly when I'm supposed to. 17 I've never done it in thirteen (13) 18 minutes, so I'm just trying to work out -- but that 19 doesn't mean you left the Oakwood, but which motel was it 20 that you travelled from in Grand Bend to -- to Forest in 21 thirteen (13) minutes? 22 A: I don't recall the name of the hotel 23 we were staying at. It's Bluewater or something very 24 close to that. 25 Q: You weren't wasting time?


1 A: No, sir. 2 Q: In fact, you were travelling at a 3 high rate of speed to do Grand Bend to Forest in thirteen 4 (13) minutes, agreed? 5 A: Agreed. 6 Q: And the high rate of speed would 7 certainly be in excess of any posted speed limit? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And that's what happens when you're a 10 police officer doing your job, you've been told you're 11 kitting up and that you were facing potentially having a 12 -- the deployment of CMU, and you know you might be 13 second in command, and you're going as fast as you can to 14 get your equipment and get back, correct? 15 A: I believe Officer Weverink and I were 16 the only two (2) members that didn't have our kit with 17 us, so, yes, we wanted to be there and back as quickly as 18 possible. 19 Q: And did you know, when you departed 20 in and around -- or I can't do an in or around, do you 21 know when you departed for Grand Bend from Forest, did 22 you know at that time you would likely be second in 23 command of CMU? 24 A: At the time I don't believe I was 25 aware of that, sir.


1 Q: All right. But you knew you were a 2 senior officer in respect of crowd management? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And you knew that your knowledge and 5 training and guidance would be an important part of the 6 CMU deployment that night, if it happened -- 7 A: That's fair. 8 Q: -- is that true? 9 A: That's fair, yes. 10 Q: All right. And who was the other 11 officer that went with you? 12 A: I believe it was Weverink. 13 Q: Was it Weverink -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Was it Weverink who drove or was it 16 you? Can you remember? 17 A: I'm pretty sure it was me, sir. 18 Q: All right. No -- no memory of the 19 speed, eh? 20 A: No, sir. 21 Q: Okay. But it was really fast? 22 A: Thirteen (13) minutes. 23 Q: Yeah. And I'd like to know, do you 24 think you might have used your lights? 25 A: Don't recall.


1 Q: Could have, when you're travelling at 2 that speed? 3 A: It's possible. 4 Q: All right. You certainly don't 5 recall being cautioned by anyone, don't use your cruiser 6 lights when you're moving between Grand Bend and Forest? 7 You don't recall being directed not to? 8 A: No, I don't recall that, sir. 9 Q: And it was certainly an exigent or 10 urgent circumstances that would justify you going at the 11 speeds you were going and activating your cruiser lights? 12 A: Could you repeat that, please? 13 Q: Fair enough. It was kind of triple- 14 barrelled, so let me break it down. 15 You'd agree with me it was a fairly 16 exigent urgent circumstance that would bring you to go 17 that speed? 18 A: It was important I get there and back 19 quickly, yes. 20 Q: It was urgent? 21 A: It wasn't life threatening, but it 22 was important that I get there and back quickly. 23 Q: All right. And there was nothing 24 about the situation that would cause you not to activate 25 the lights, given the speed you were travelling?


1 There was nothing that would cause you not 2 to activate the lights, given the speed you were 3 travelling? 4 A: If there's no traffic, there's no 5 need to have lights on. I don't recall what -- what the 6 traffic conditions were at -- 7 Q: Fair enough. 8 A: -- that time of the evening, in this 9 area. It's -- there tends not to be a lot of traffic. 10 Q: Okay. Now, you've got reflected that 11 you left at 20:27 from the hotel. Do you have any memory 12 --and I apologize, Mr. Commissioner, for the detail. I 13 believe it'll be explained as -- as my questioning goes 14 on, so I hope you'll bear with me. 15 Do you recall what you did at the hotel? 16 Did you simply grab a bag and get back in the car or did 17 you have to get suited when you were at the hotel in 18 Grand Bend. 19 Do you recall what you did? 20 A: We didn't suit up there. 21 Q: All right. 22 A: I grabbed a bag. 23 Q: Grabbed a bag. How many minutes do 24 you think it might have taken you? 25 A: Be less than a minute.


1 Q: All right. So we have you leaving 2 the hotel in Grand Bend at 20:27. Do you know what time 3 you would have arrived at that hotel? 4 A: No, sir. 5 Q: Okay. But based on what you've just 6 told me, was there anything else you did other than drive 7 from Forest to get to the hotel? 8 A: No, that was my purpose, to go get my 9 equipment and return. 10 Q: Okay. It is a fair assumption that 11 it took you roughly the same time to get to the hotel as 12 it took to get back? 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 A: I would imagine it would be similar. 17 Q: Okay. So if we were to work 18 backwards, say -- you say it takes you a minute at the 19 hotel, not much more. 20 If we were to work backwards, it's safe to 21 assume you would have departed from the Forest Detachment 22 in order to go to Grand Bend in and around what time, 23 looking at your notes? 24 A: Well, approximately 20:10. 25 Q: 20:10. So at 20:10 the following --


1 and -- and were there any radio transmissions between 2 20:10 and 20:40 that you recall that come to mind about 3 your role, your functions, or your orders? 4 A: Not that I recall, sir. 5 Q: All right. And did you note any 6 down? 7 A: No. 8 Q: So it's safe to say that as of 20:10 9 when you left Forest -- and that's Forest Command Post, 10 yes? 11 A: Correct. 12 Q: At 20:10 when you left Forest Command 13 Post you knew a couple of things, I -- I just want to 14 clarify this with you, you knew for example that CMU 15 maybe mobilized and that you may need your hard TAC, 16 correct? 17 A: I knew I needed my hard TAC and that 18 CMU may be mobilized. 19 Q: Yes. And then -- and that's -- 20 that's what I just said isn't it? 21 A: No. 22 Q: Oh, I'm sorry. 23 A: You said I may need my hard TAC. 24 Well, I will need my hard TAC. 25 Q: Oh, fair enough. Okay. You knew


1 that CMU may be mobilized and you knew you would need 2 your hard TAC? 3 A: Because we were asked to get ready, I 4 needed it. Whether we got deployed or not was another 5 question. 6 Q: Sure. And you -- you testified to 7 Ms. Vella that you recall Stan Korosec telling you to get 8 prepared; that's what you told Ms. Vella. I can give you 9 the page number if you want? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. And so it's fair to say 12 that before 20:10 it is your recollection that Stan 13 Korosec would have said, Get prepared, We may need to use 14 CMU, or words to that effect, Get your hard TAC? 15 A: That would be the essence, yes. 16 Q: All right. And you were quite candid 17 with Ms. Vella and I'll -- I'll take you to it. It's a 18 very brief passage but I want to make sure that I give 19 you the proper reference. 20 At page 124, and I'm just going to read 21 you what I -- what I got from the transcript that I read 22 quite closely subsequently to your evidence. 23 24 (BRIEF PAUSE) 25


1 Ms. Vella, at line 4, says: 2 "Q: And were all members of the ERT - 3 - two (2) ERT teams in hard TAC? 4 A: At that point, as I recall, yes. 5 Q: Who was the designated team leader 6 or incident commander for that -- for 7 the CMU that night? 8 A: That night it was Acting -- or 9 sorry, Staff Sergeant Wade Lacroix. 10 Q: Who called out the CMU that night? 11 A: Well, Sergeant Korosec asked us to 12 prepare for that. 13 Q: On behalf of...? 14 A: I believe it was Inspector Carson. 15 I'm not totally sure." 16 That's what you told Ms. Vella? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: All right. And I take it that's 19 still true today? 20 A: That's my understanding, yes. 21 Q: All right. No, I mean the evidence 22 you gave Ms. Vella is still true today? 23 A: Yes, sir. 24 Q: All right. And what I'm interested 25 in, first of all, is when you told Ms. Vella that all


1 members of the two (2) ERT teams were in hard TAC, is it 2 fair to say that first of all you and the other officer 3 were the only ones that didn't have your hard TAC with 4 you when you left as of the time you left Forest Command 5 Post, true? 6 A: Correct. 7 Q: And so we can assume then that the 8 other ERT members started dressing in their hard TAC to 9 the extent they had it with them prior to 20:10, right? 10 A: That's possible. 11 Q: Okay. It's consistent with your 12 memory that when you returned by 20:40 they were in their 13 hard TAC, correct? 14 A: I would say most if not all, yes. 15 Q: All right. And it's consistent with 16 your memory that people were instructed to kit up and 17 that you realized you needed to go to Grand Bend, and all 18 of that happened in and around the period of 20:00 to 19 20:10, correct? 20 People were instructed to kit up and you 21 realized that you needed to get your hard TAC in Grand 22 Bend and all that happened between 20:00 and 20:10, 23 correct? 24 A: At some point prior to 20:10, yes. 25 Q: Okay. At some point prior to 20:10.


1 So it might have happened before 20:00? 2 A: I'm just looking at an entry in my 3 notebook at about 7:35 p.m. here. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 To nail down a time I can't, but I can 8 certainly say that it would be between approximately 7:35 9 p.m. and approximately 8:10 p.m. 10 Q: And there's something else you 11 mentioned to Ms. Vella, you said that the switch of the 12 ERT shifts happens in and around 7:00 to 7:30. And I 13 just want to give you that reference. 14 Is that consistent with your recollection? 15 A: In that timeline, yes, that's 16 consistent. 17 Q: And Mr. Millar pointed out -- and by 18 the way, that evidence you give at page 114, you said: 19 "Two (2) ERT teams attended to relieve 20 the day shift." 21 You said that was around 7:20 p.m. Is 22 that consistent with your memory? 23 A: Yes, sir. 24 Q: All right. Mr. Millar had pointed 25 out on the record before that there's no designated hard


1 time for the switch in shifts; is that true or...? 2 A: Well seven o'clock is -- is -- was 3 the end of the deployment -- deployed part of the shift. 4 There is briefing, debriefing happening. It -- it was 5 not, as you just said, hard and fast. But that is the 6 ballpark. 7 Q: And that's why you said, in and 8 around, and I'll give you the quote, for what it's worth. 9 You said: 10 "I left approximately 7:20. Two (2) 11 different ERT teams attended the area 12 to relieve the day shift, so our shift 13 was ending." 14 You said that at page 114, line 14. 15 A: Yes, that sounds right. 16 Q: All right. And we have heard 17 evidence that between 7:50 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., so in 18 other words between 19:50 and 20:00 hours, Detective 19 Sergeant Mark Wright held back the ERT shift that was 20 currently on duty and told them to stay, that is, he held 21 them back from going home. 22 Did you know that? 23 A: We were being held. My recollection 24 is we had officers down on the beach from the day shift, 25 as I was returning to the Forest command site.


1 I believe it was Officer Spencer and the 2 second officer I -- I don't -- don't recall. 3 Q: All right. But you don't dispute 4 that that would have happened? We've heard that from 5 Mark Wright that he held the day shift back. You don't 6 dispute that happened? 7 A: Well, if that's that Mark Wright 8 said, he said it. 9 Q: I just want to know if you know 10 anything to the contrary, that's all. 11 A: I don't recall getting any orders 12 from Mark Wright, sir. 13 Q: Okay. Do you -- and -- and this is 14 what I wanted to ask you about next, actually. 15 You -- you made reference to Ms. Vella 16 that you -- it sounds like you said, I'm not sure, I 17 believed that Korosec was acting on the authority of 18 Carson. 19 And you said, I'm not sure. Do you 20 remember saying that? 21 A: Yes, sir. 22 Q: And I read it to you again today. 23 A: You did. 24 Q: And -- and you said, I don't remember 25 getting any orders, and I want to pursue that a little


1 more with you. 2 In and around the hours of 20:30 to [sic] 3 20:10, right before you leave, right at the moment you 4 leave for Grand Bend. 5 A: You mean 19:30, sir? 6 Q: I apologize. In around the hours of 7 19:30 and 20:10, in and around that time period, how 8 long, or when would you have been at the Command Post at 9 Forest? What time period in -- in that space, in that 10 forty (40) minutes? 11 A: I arrived at the Command Post at 12 approximately 7:35 p.m. 13 Q: All right. And what I noticed -- and 14 then you would have been there right to 20:10, fair? 15 A: Approximately, fair. 16 Q: Now what I noticed was that there's 17 nothing in your testimony to Ms. Vella, I'm not being 18 critical about it, I just picked up on this, there's 19 nothing after I reviewed the transcripts in your 20 testimony about you observing or hearing Dale Linton make 21 any statements between 19:30 and 20:10. 22 You -- you don't say anything about 23 hearing him at all. 24 A: Correct, sir. 25 Q: And in fact, there's nothing in your


1 notes about you hearing Dale Linton tell you anything in 2 that time period, between 19:30 and 20:10, true? 3 A: True. 4 Q: And there's nothing in your notes 5 about you hearing Dale Linton give directions to anybody 6 else between the hours of 19:30 and 20:10; is that true? 7 A: Nothing in my notes, that's true. 8 Q: And nothing in what you told Ms. 9 Vella? 10 A: True. 11 Q: Did you hear Mr. Linton say anything 12 by way of directions, or otherwise, that you haven't told 13 us about, between 19:30 and 20:10? 14 A: I have no independent recollection of 15 Inspector Linton speaking with us. He may well of, I 16 can't be sure. I don't know. 17 Q: All right. And when you say, "I have 18 no independent recollection," being a picayune lawyer, 19 you -- you have no dependent recollection, either? You - 20 - you can't look to your notes and say I see -- I see it 21 here? 22 A: That's fair, sir. 23 Q: Okay. So you have no recollection, 24 period, of Dale Linton giving an instruction to you, or 25 giving an instruction, in your presence, to others,


1 correct? 2 A: Correct. 3 Q: Okay. Now the whole back of ERT, as 4 far as you understood, and I take -- well, let me back 5 up. I apologize. I'll rephrase this. 6 You had made mention that, really, as far 7 as you were concerned, the issue of officers getting into 8 hard TAC would have occurred, not in my narrow spot of 9 20:00 to 20:10, it could have occurred anywhere from 10 20:35 (sic) to 20:10, true? 11 You made a point of pointing that out to 12 me. 19:35 to 20:10, that's what you said to me. 13 A: There were conversations from Stan 14 Korosec and -- and instructions and some briefing notes, 15 some information. There was the issue of equipment. So 16 I'm not going to pull out a stop watch and try and think 17 back to how long that would have taken. 18 But if one wanted to have a -- an earliest 19 moment and a latest moment, the times that you indicate 20 of earliest possible moment of 7:35 is correct, and 21 latest possible moment of approximately 8:10 would be 22 correct as well. 23 Q: Okay. You've identified a range for 24 us. 25 A: Yes, sir.


1 Q: And in your mind, would you agree 2 that the idea, certainly as far as you saw, of the ERT 3 teams being held back, and that only happened in -- in 4 the last -- in the fifteen (15) minute period before 5 then, in your mind, the ERT teams are being held back in 6 the event they needed to don hard TAC and be deployed as 7 CMU, correct? 8 9 (BRIEF PAUSE) 10 11 A: We were being held back -- there was 12 some developments occurring. There was a need to remain 13 on scene. As to whether or not we were to put on hard 14 TAC straight away, it was prepare for that and suit up in 15 hard TAC, but there was an indication that something was 16 transpiring and there -- a moment or so, then it was, you 17 know, preparing your hard TAC. 18 So it didn't come down to one (1) straight 19 order, as I recall. There was an indication of 20 something's going on. There was a pause, the duration of 21 which I can't be certain. 22 And then there was the instructions, 23 prepare for your hard TAC. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE)


1 Q: So when you use the words, 2 Preparation for, Suit up, you're saying from the time 3 ERT's held back, there's a discussion directed towards we 4 might have to suit up in hard TAC, but it doesn't happen 5 right away; correct? 6 A: If you break it down into one (1) 7 minute intervals, yes. It doesn't happen right away. 8 Q: But -- 9 A: All this does occur in the span of 10 approximately thirty (30) minutes. 11 Q: Right. So the decision gets made to 12 hold ERT back, and the next thing you recall is there's a 13 discussion towards suiting up in the event of a 14 deployment of CMU, correct? 15 A: That's fair. 16 Q: And then the next thing you recall is 17 that you realize you don't have your hard TAC and you get 18 on the road, post haste, and get to Grand Bend -- 19 A: Yes, sir. 20 Q: -- correct? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And when you get back at 20:40, when 23 you get back, you're -- you're at the Forest Detachment 24 by 20:40? 25 A: Yes, sir.


1 Q: Everyone's suited up, yes? 2 A: I can't say everyone. 3 Q: Most? I thought that's what you 4 said. 5 A: That's fair. 6 Q: Okay. During the drive -- I asked 7 you before but now I want to focus your attention on 8 something. 9 During the drive that you were in the 10 cruiser, between 20:10 and 20:40, taking into account the 11 minutes you went to the hotel and back, all right, to get 12 your equipment, do you ever recall receiving any kind of 13 direction from any senior officer by way of radio in 14 terms of the deployment of CMU? 15 A: I don't recall, sir. 16 Q: All right. And would you agree with 17 me, if you did receive such a direction between 20:10 and 18 20:40, it would be part of your duties to -- to note the 19 direction you got, yes? 20 It -- 21 A: No. 22 Q: -- came from a senior, superior 23 officer. You got a direction about CMU, it would be part 24 of your duties to note that direction down, eventually, 25 yes?


1 A: I wouldn't agree that I would record 2 every conversation, or every radio utterance that I had, 3 or every direction. 4 Q: From your senior -- 5 A: I would -- 6 Q: -- officers? 7 A: It would depend on the direction, 8 sir. 9 Q: Okay. If it was a direction relating 10 to the mobilization of CMU? You ultimately became the 11 second in command of CMU? 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: You made a point of noting: 14 "20:27 Go to get my hard TAC. 15 20:40 Come back." 16 I'm asking you, wouldn't it be part of 17 your practice if you got a direction from a CM -- I'm 18 sorry, if you got a direction from a senior officer in 19 respect of the deployment of CMU while you were in the 20 cruiser, wouldn't it be consistent with your practice to 21 eventually note that down, that you got an order about 22 the deployment of CMU? 23 A: It's not an absolute, sir, so I don't 24 know how I can answer that for you. 25 Q: I didn't ask if it was an absolute.


1 I asked was it -- would it be consistent with your 2 practice? 3 A: In as much as it's consistent that I 4 don't jot everything down, yes. 5 Q: All right. But a direction from a 6 senior officer in respect of the deployment of CMU isn't 7 everything is it? 8 A: No, sir. 9 Q: No. In fact it's -- it would be 10 fairly significant to marshal thirty (30) to forty (40) 11 police officers and for you to be second in command; that 12 would be significant, yes? 13 A: Yes, that's duly noted in here. 14 Q: And it would be significant for the 15 nature of the mission, if you were ordered on the nature 16 of the mission at the time, between 20:10 and 20:40, that 17 would be significant, yes? 18 A: It's -- not necessarily. It's -- 19 it's noted in here what the mission was in a couple of 20 instances. If I had of been informed by radio of that 21 it's repeated later. You have to appreciate these notes 22 were made the following morning. 23 Q: And -- 24 A: And I did my best to record as much 25 information as I could.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: There's more information in here that 3 isn't recorded. 4 Q: Do you recall the words used by Mr. 5 Korosec when you say as you did, at page 124, when you 6 say as you did that Stan Korosec asked us to prepare for 7 that, Stan Korosec asked us to prepare for that, and this 8 is in advance of 20:10, do you recall the words that Stan 9 Korosec used? 10 A: The words used, sir? 11 Q: Hmm hmm. 12 A: No, I can't. 13 Q: Thank you. But the one (1) thing I 14 take it you can tell us since you went on to tell Ms. 15 Vella that you thought it was actually -- might have been 16 on behalf of Carson, but you're not sure, the one (1) 17 thing you can tell us is that he didn't use the words, 18 Inspector Dale Linton is directing you to get ready, to 19 suit up in hard TAC. 20 He didn't use those words or you'd 21 remember that, right? 22 A: No, I wouldn't agree. He could have 23 used those words, I don't know. 24 Q: You don't remember it though? 25 A: No, sir.


1 Q: Okay. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 Q: Were you familiar at the time that 6 the deployment of CMU required a staff sergeant to lead 7 the CMU? 8 A: Yes, sir. 9 Q: How would you have known that on 10 September 6th, 1995? 11 A: Because I was an instructor and when 12 the CMU was deployed we needed a Level 1 Incident 13 Commander with us which is the staff sergeant. 14 Q: All right. You were not a staff 15 sergeant? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And I had asked Mark Wright so I'm -- 18 I'm sorry, I had asked Officer -- then Officer Wade 19 Lacroix and I'm -- I'm now asking you, do you know if 20 Mark Wright knew it required a staff sergeant to lead a 21 CMU? And that's the rule, right? 22 A: I don't know why he would know, he 23 wasn't part of the ERT Program or the Crowd Management 24 Program. 25 Q: Do you know if Stan Korosec would


1 know that? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: He would? 4 A: He should have. 5 Q: All right. Because that would be 6 part of his job? 7 A: Stan was part of the Emergency 8 Response Team Program. Crowd Management is part of that 9 and that's part of the instruction we -- we give and all 10 members were trained prior to September of '95. 11 Q: So you'd be -- that's all to say 12 well, you -- you don't have direct recollection of him 13 telling you -- well, do you have a direct recollection of 14 Stan Korosec telling you, I know we need a staff 15 sergeant? 16 A: No, sir, I don't. 17 Q: Okay. But you would assume he knew? 18 A: yeah, that's fair. 19 Q: Okay. And it's also fair to say that 20 a logical person that Stan Korosec might rely upon for 21 that would be Wade Lacroix, yes? 22 A: He was the Level 1 Incident Command 23 Crowd Management trained staff sergeant in that area. 24 Q: So there's nothing unusual is there 25 about the notion of first holding the ERT shifts back in


1 case they have to get into hard TAC and making -- taking 2 also the step of making sure there's a staff sergeant 3 that can lead them? 4 There's nothing unusual about that? 5 A: No. 6 Q: You reflect in your notes that Wade 7 Lacroix arrived at 21:10, yes? 8 A: That's when I -- approximately 21:10 9 when I first see him. 10 Q: So he arrives at the Forest Command 11 Post in and around 21:10? 12 Q: Well, I saw him at 21:10. What time 13 he arrived I didn't see. 14 Q: That's fair. That's fair. And the 15 reason I ask that is that there's already been a twenty 16 (20) minute discrepancy once before in Mr. Lacroix's 17 notes and the scribe notes; that is a discrepancy between 18 when he's called, 20:00, according to Mr. Lacroix's notes 19 and then the scribes say 20:21. 20 And now we see another discrepancy because Mr. Lacroix's 21 notes have him arriving at Forest at 21:30 and yours show 22 21:10 is when you see him, correct? 23 A: Well that's what I put down 24 approximately, yes. 25 Q: It seems to be off by twenty (20)


1 minutes. There seems to be a discrepancy of twenty (20) 2 minutes; it's just consistent, that's all. 3 Now from the time Wade Lacroix arrives at 4 21:10, would you agree with me that there is anticipation 5 of deploying CMU in hard TAC form; is that fair? 6 As at 21:10 you're of the view -- you've 7 already been training people before Lacroix shows up, 8 right? 9 A: I was re -- reviewing different 10 formations and commands, yes. 11 Q: Yeah, you were going over the kinds 12 of formations they would need, right? 13 A: If we were deployed, yes. 14 Q: In advance of 21:10? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And by 21:10 you and Wade Lacroix are 17 discussing you being second in command. 18 A: I don't know at what point it was 19 decided I would be his 2-IC, second in commander, sorry, 20 but it was in and around that timeline. 21 Q: And Ms. Tuck-Jackson asked you 22 questions about whether CMU was there to support TRU. Do 23 you remember her asking questions about that? 24 A: Yes, sir. 25 Q: Why couldn't TRU have effected


1 arrests and CMU be in hard TAC to support them? Why 2 couldn't that be? 3 A: It doesn't make much sense. Arrests 4 in a crowd situation are our primary responsibility, not 5 TRU. They're not trained in crowd management, the ERT 6 team is. That's one of our key functions. 7 Q: So you wouldn't expect to see a 8 scenario where TRU was -- you're telling me that you 9 don't expect to see a scenario where TRU would be the 10 team tasked with affecting arrests and CMU in hard task - 11 - hard TAC would support them? You don't envisage that? 12 A: No, sir. 13 Q: And you didn't envisage that that 14 night? 15 A: I did not. 16 Q: On the other hand you weren't 17 provided an inventory of firearms that the occupiers 18 might have at the fence at 21:00 or 21:00:05 that night 19 either were you? 20 A: No, I wasn't. 21 Q: Did you know that the TRU team 22 leader, Skinner, had coms with Zupancic, another member 23 of TRU, indicating an inventory of firearms that might be 24 at the fence line including imitation AK-47's, Rugers and 25 Molotov cocktails.


1 Did you know that? 2 A: I didn't. 3 Q: Sorry? 4 A: I did not, no. 5 Q: All right. I can take you to all the 6 evidentiary passages but having tortured the Commissioner 7 once on this, I'll simply summarize a few of the pieces 8 of evidence we've gone over as a Commission. 9 First of all, did you know that Kent 10 Skinner thought there was a fair probability that there 11 would be firearms at the fence line when they approached 12 that night on September 6th, 1995? 13 A: I didn't know that. 14 Q: Did you know that the head of the 15 arrest team as part of your CMU, Wayde Jacklin, thought 16 that firearms at the fence line were a quote/unquote, 17 "viable threat"? 18 Did you know that? 19 A: I didn't know what Wayde was thinking 20 that night, no. 21 Q: No. But I'm asking you something 22 specific. I'm not saying what was Wayde thinking, I'm 23 saying did you know, he's testified to that, that he 24 thought that firearms in the fashion that I've just 25 described, were a viable threat at the fence line?


1 Did you know that? 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just before 3 you answer, sir. 4 Yes, Ms. Jones...? 5 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner what 6 this Witness has stated is he doesn't know what somebody 7 else was thinking at the time. And maybe if Mr. 8 Falconer's question is: Did you know what that witness 9 had testified to -- you know, I don't know if that's, in 10 fact, what he's asking based on the second question. 11 But this Witness has said quite fairly, I 12 don't know what's in their mind. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I think 14 that -- 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yeah, I think 16 that's -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- covers 18 it. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I mean, we don't 20 have to go back for -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I can -- I can 23 fix it -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- so that I can


1 meet My Friend's needs. 2 3 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 4 Q: Wayde Jacklin testified that he saw 5 firearms in the fashion I've described to you as a quote/ 6 unquote, "viable threat at the fence line" and what I 7 want to know is, were you familiar that that was his 8 view? 9 A: I was not. 10 Q: Thank you. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 Q: In terms of the existence of firearms 15 and -- and the evidence you've given to date, would you 16 agree that it would be entirely in keeping with an 17 incident commander's functions if he thought that 18 firearms were at the fence line, to utilize TRU instead 19 of CMU? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 A: There's a -- a range, sir, of 24 probability. It's a decision of the Incident Commander 25 to know when that threshold is met, whether to send TRU


1 or Crowd Management. 2 Q: Fair enough. Well, okay, and that's 3 fair. Your point to me, as I try to draw this out of 4 you, your point to me is that it depends on what he 5 thought of the information; that is the Incident 6 Commander thought of the information? 7 A: That's fair, yes. 8 Q: Okay. But now taking the assistance 9 you gave Ms. Vella by way of expert evidence, remember 10 you gave her assistance on what CMU does and doesn't do, 11 right? 12 A: Yes, sir. 13 Q: Okay. Taking that expertise and 14 assisting me now, I want to understand something. 15 If the Incident Commander thought that 16 information had a fair probability to it, had a viability 17 to it, all right, whether the fact that it ultimately 18 ended up being fantasy, you and I have to leave behind 19 for this hypothetical, all right? Okay? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: If the incident thought that there 22 was a fair probability to this information, it would be 23 entirely in keeping with his functions as Incident 24 Commander and the role of TRU to use TRU to effect 25 arrests, agreed?


1 A: No. 2 Q: All right. And why not? 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 A: If there was going to be contact with 7 the occupiers, in a manner that would result in arrests, 8 again the Crowd Management Unit is -- is numerous, the 9 TRU members are not. 10 We're also better situ -- or suited 11 because of our equipment to handle throwable objects; 12 stones, rocks, that type of a thing and the TRU members 13 were not. 14 Q: Okay. But you testified to Ms. 15 Vella, I can give you the page numbers if you'd like, 16 that if there was a real prospect of firearms, it would 17 not be appropriate to deploy CMU; that's what you told 18 Ms. Vella, not a few days ago. 19 Is that still your evidence? 20 A: If I could see the quote again. If 21 firearms were confirmed, then definitely Crowd Management 22 would -- should not have been sent down the road or would 23 not be. 24 Q: All right. All right. So if 25 firearms are confirmed, Crowd Management should not be


1 sent down the road and would not have been, correct? 2 That's what you just said? 3 A: That's my view of it, yes. 4 Q: All right. And when Kent Skinner, 5 the head of TRU says he viewed firearms as a fair 6 probability, you would certainly want to know more 7 because that doesn't -- that has the ring of reality to 8 it, doesn't it? 9 A: In those words it does, yes. 10 Q: Okay. 11 12 (BRIEF PAUSE) 13 14 Q: I just want to clarify one (1) other 15 item before I move on. And I see we've been going for a 16 while, Mr. Commissioner. I started at 10:45 in terms of 17 my examination, so I'd -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 10:40 on 19 that -- 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Ross is -- 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm watching 22 that clock -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I asked Mr. Ross -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- but 25 you're close, you're close enough. that's fine.


1 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: What are you 3 suggesting? 4 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm going to 5 suggest after I've finished this part we take a break -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- since we've been 8 going since 10:00. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: I want to understand one (1) aspect 13 of all of this and that is, prior to the suiting up -- 14 and let me back up. The act of suiting up in hard TAC 15 doesn't mean CMU will be deployed, does it? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: Right. It could still be held in 18 abeyance? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Okay. But in that time period 21 between the ERT shift being held back as far as your 22 memory goes, and the process whereby there's a discussion 23 about preparing and suiting up, does -- do many minutes 24 go by? 25 I mean, ERT gets held back and then we're


1 at the 7:35 part of the range. 2 Is there much that goes on between the 3 time of holding ERT back and then the notion of preparing 4 for and maybe suiting up; does much time go by? 5 A: I -- I just don't understand where 6 you're going with -- with the timelines. I have 7:35, 7 we're back at the station -- 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: -- and after I arrive back Sergeant 10 Korosec goes a bit of a debrief. Some information is -- 11 is brought in by Sergeant Graham. There's also the 12 issuance of the ASP baton. And Sergeant Grant gives us a 13 demonstration on its deployment, how to open it, close 14 it; there's a tensioner spring within the handle so that 15 would take a number of minutes. 16 And it was after the ASP batons were 17 issued to us, and my recollection is his session to us 18 was more or less finished when we were informed that we 19 were being held over, there was something going on. And 20 then shortly thereafter we were told to prepare in our 21 hard TAC. 22 Q: And that's the part I -- and thank 23 you for doing that because you did it much better than I 24 -- than I could have through my questions. It's the, 25 "shortly thereafter." And shortly thereafter we were


1 told to get ready for our hard TAC. 2 We're talking two (2) to three (3) 3 minutes; is that fair? 4 A: I can't say on the number of minutes, 5 sir, it's -- 6 Q: All right. But I'm not far off the 7 mark? It's not half an hour? It's not an hour? 8 A: Oh, certainly not. 9 Q: Okay. This is a good time, Mr. 10 Commissioner. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 12 We'll take a morning break now. 13 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 14 for fifteen (15) minutes. 15 16 --- Upon recessing at 11:28 a.m. 17 --- Upon resuming at 11:49 a.m. 18 19 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 20 resumed, please be seated. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 25 Q: Sergeant Hebblethwaite, you referred,


1 at pages 107 to 108, of your evidence of May 11th in 2 pages 113 to 114, to a meeting with residents by the TOC, 3 the Tactical Operations Centre, off of East Parkway 4 Drive. 5 And -- and your meeting that you're 6 referring to would have been on September 6th between 7 18:30 and 19:20, if that gives you some context. 8 A: It was, I believe, a little bit 9 before that, just -- if I may check my notes here. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 A: Initially my observations of the 14 gathering were started at 17:50 hours. 15 Q: So for us mortals, 5:50 p.m.? 16 A: 5:50 p.m. 17 Q: All right. And then -- 18 A: And they were still there when I 19 returned at approximately 6:30 p.m. 20 Q: And then you departed that area at 21 approximately...? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 A: I don't have an exact time I left.


1 Q: I -- I have evidence from you at 2 pages 113 to 114, page 114, line 14: 3 "I left approximately 7:20." 4 A: That may have been what I inferred 5 from the -- the entry at 7:20 p.m. that says the Number 1 6 and Number 2 ERT Teams were attending the area to relieve 7 the day shift. 8 Q: All right. So -- 9 A: I don't recall being there that long; 10 that's a long time. And I don't recall the meeting going 11 that long. 12 Q: But you actually attended, saw them, 13 and then left and then came back? 14 A: That's correct. 15 Q: Right. So in any event, based on 16 your evidence thus far, you would say to us that you -- 17 you have a note of an observation of the residence near 18 the Tactical Operations Centre off of East Parkway Drive, 19 which is the MNR parking lot, right? 20 A: Right. 21 Q: And that's where the CMU unit 22 ultimately marches from? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: To go towards the sandy parking lot? 25 A: Correct.


1 Q: So these residents would have been 2 gathering approximately 800 metres from the sandy parking 3 lot, west on East Parkway Drive? 4 A: Correct. 5 Q: And you would have seen them in and 6 around 5:50 p.m. and you -- you could have been with them 7 as late as 7:20 p.m.? 8 A: Could have, but not likely. I don't 9 believe -- 10 Q: Okay. What would you -- 11 A: -- it would have went that long. 12 Q: Can you narrow it for us then? 13 A: I can't, sorry, no. 14 Q: Okay. In any event, you made a 15 reference, in your evidence to Ms. Vella, that you felt 16 that there was a mood -- I'm quoting from page 108. You 17 describe the mood of the residents. You describe there 18 being approximately thirty (30); is that right? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: And you said: 21 "They -- there was a mood of unease, a 22 mood of anxiety, a mood of wanting 23 police to -- to do something. There 24 was a mood of fear amongst the group." 25 Do you remember saying all those things?


1 A: Yes, sir. 2 Q: And that was true, yes? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And then... 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 Q: ...you said at page 113, line 8: 9 "My sense was that in their eyes not 10 enough was being done by the police, 11 and that at this point it was up to us 12 to try and allay their concerns, to 13 make sure they were aware we weren't 14 simply doing nothing, that we were in 15 the process of dealing with the 16 situation in the most prudent fashion 17 we could." 18 And then line 5, page 114: 19 "That was my sense of it. There was 20 some desperation, a desperation in the 21 air at the time." 22 Do you remember saying all that to Ms. 23 Vella? 24 A: I did say that, yes. 25 Q: Can --


1 A: Another word I -- I could have used 2 would be 'exasperation'. 3 Q: All right. But the words you used 4 with Ms. Vella, twice, at lines 5 and 6 of page 114: 5 "There was some desperation, a 6 desperation in the air at the time." 7 You said that to Ms. Vella? 8 A: I did. 9 Q: And you were being candid with her? 10 A: I was. 11 Q: All right. And would you agree with 12 me that, ultimately, that there was an expectation that 13 you sense, that is, I only want -- you can't climb into 14 the mind of the residents, all right, and we're not 15 allowed to ask you questions that have you do that, okay? 16 A: All right. 17 Q: We can get your observations the way 18 you explained it to Ms. Vella, you said "my sense was" so 19 that's what I -- I'm asking you about. 20 There was an expectation on the part of 21 these people that you gleaned for police to do something, 22 correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: Okay. And -- and it wasn't to simply 25 monitor the situation on an ongoing basis. That's not


1 what they were looking for, was it? The residents were 2 not looking for you to simply monitor the situation on an 3 ongoing basis. 4 A: They -- they wanted information and - 5 - and I -- my sense looking back at it, with everything 6 I've read and I know that I've testified to, that in 7 addition to wanting to see us do something, they wanted 8 to know that we were doing something. 9 And it was -- 10 Q: Right. 11 A: -- with -- with information, anxiety 12 gets lessened in any situation and that's -- 13 Q: Fair enough. 14 A: -- that's what was imparted of that 15 night was the information I imparted to the woman about 16 the judicial order being sought, the injunction. And I 17 didn't hear all or very much of anything that Mark Wright 18 said so I can't comment on specifics that he said, but he 19 was dealing with the crowd. 20 And Mark Wright, in the position that he 21 was in, was privy to more information than I was, so 22 whether he provided that to the crowd or not, I don't 23 know. 24 Q: And you said to Ms. Vella that when 25 she asked you these crowd of residents posed a threat to


1 public safety, your answer at line 9 was: 2 "At the immediate time it didn't, no. 3 But my sense was that this may be 4 evolving if 5 -- if things continued in their view on 6 unabated." 7 Do you remember saying that to Ms. Vella? 8 A: I do. 9 Q: And that was true? That was your 10 sense? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And -- and what you meant by that was 13 that if things continued in their view, right, unabated, 14 unaddressed, that it might evolve into a public safety 15 issue; that was what you were trying to tell Ms. Vella. 16 A: The potential seemed to be there, 17 yes. 18 Q: Right. And it was a potential 19 towards violence, that was a concern? 20 A: A potential of some sort of action on 21 their part, yes. 22 Q: That would result in violence. 23 A: With the potential, yes. 24 Q: Right. A clash with the occupiers. 25 A: I don't know that.


1 Q: No, I never said you knew it any more 2 than you know what the occupiers are going to do. I just 3 want your sense of your public safety concern that you 4 explained to Ms. Vella. 5 You had a concern that if this went 6 unabated, you're not saying it will or predicting it with 7 a certainty but you had a concern that if it went 8 unabated, that these people might take actions into their 9 own hands and there might be a clash with the occupiers, 10 true? 11 A: I don't believe I said the last 12 piece, the clash with the occupiers. 13 Q: No, you didn't. I'm now making a 14 suggestion to you that that was your concern. 15 A: It's a possibility. 16 Q: Right. But it was a possibility that 17 animated the concern about public safety, correct? 18 A: My concern? 19 Q: Yes. I mean your concern about 20 public safety wasn't in the air, there must have been 21 something that would threaten their public safety or 22 others, correct? 23 A: Correct. 24 Q: And the concern you had was it might 25 happen that if they get sufficiently desperate or


1 exasperated that they may engage in a clash with the 2 occupiers. 3 A: That was one potential option, yes. 4 Q: Right. And what I'm going to ask you 5 is that you knew it was important therefore to 6 communicate to these people that the police were doing 7 something, yes? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And your method of doing it was to 10 refer to the obtaining of an injunction? 11 A: I did. 12 Q: Right. And the intent behind that of 13 telling them about the injunction, it wasn't just we're 14 going to get a piece of paper, I mean that wasn't -- I 15 mean would it have had much affect if you said, We're 16 just going to get a piece of paper and then we're going 17 to continue to monitor? 18 I take it you were trying to tell them, 19 We're going to get a piece of paper and once we have the 20 order of the court, we're going to clear the Park? 21 That was the point wasn't it? 22 A: That's not a fair summary of that. 23 Q: What was the intent of telling them, 24 we're going to get an injunction? 25 A: It's a matter of -- a way of showing


1 that we were doing something more than just observing. 2 Q: And that -- and that was it? You 3 just wanted them to know that you were going to get a 4 piece of paper. 5 A: Well, sir, the injunction once it's 6 issued, the occupiers may have left the Park, just be -- 7 on the mere fact that the authority was there issued by 8 the court, agreed to leave. 9 Q: Agreed. Agreed. And if they didn't 10 leave the Park, what was the reassurance you were trying 11 to give the residents about the piece of paper? 12 A: I wasn't trying to give them 13 anything. 14 Q: You weren't seeking to reassure them? 15 A: I was providing information of what 16 steps were being taken that I could share with them; I 17 did so. With that information hopefully I was allaying 18 some anxiety on their part. 19 Q: How -- 20 A: As to what we would do once the 21 injunction was -- was issued. I certainly would not have 22 speculated. It was their -- it was held out to be what 23 it was, that were seeking judicial authority or judicial 24 injunction to have the occupiers vacate the Park. And 25 what transpired once that order was issued, would be


1 dictated or determined by what the occupiers did. 2 If they honoured and obeyed it and 3 recognized it, the police do nothing. If they don't, 4 then the police have to decide when and where that it 5 becomes necessary for us to be involved directly. 6 Q: You said you hoped telling them about 7 the injunction would allay their concerns. That's what 8 you said. 9 How would it allay their concerns? How 10 did you hope it would allay their concerns? 11 A: To tell them that we were doing 12 something more than what they maybe perceived we were 13 doing. 14 Q: In your mind, you had no intention 15 of, nor did you have in your mind in the time, that you 16 might be transmitting the message that once you obtain an 17 injunction, you can have the force of law to clear the 18 Park? 19 That was not in your mind at the time? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: Okay. Thank you. 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: Now this group of residents that you


1 had this communication with, was the same group of 2 residents that Mark Wright had communication with. 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: Okay. And there wasn't a designated 5 leader of this group, was there? 6 A: My recollection is there was a man 7 and a woman that seemed to be speaking the most, seemed 8 to be the leaders. I don't know if they were an actual 9 couple, but it was two (2) persons. 10 Q: Because I saw you say in the evidence 11 they seemed to do most of the talking? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: But you never said they were the 14 leaders? 15 A: No, but the leaders generally do most 16 of the talking. 17 Q: All right. But did anybody designate 18 them as the leaders? 19 A: No. No, they did not. 20 Q: All right. So nobody came to you and 21 said here's Mr. A and Ms. B. and they are our leaders and 22 all your negotiations should be with them. That didn't 23 happen? 24 A: With me, no. 25 Q: And to -- it didn't happen in your


1 presence? 2 A: No. 3 Q: All right. But since they did most 4 of the talking, you engaged them? 5 A: I didn't engage those -- that 6 couple -- 7 Q: I don't like the word engaged -- 8 A: I engaged a -- 9 Q: -- because it may mean something else 10 for a CMU officer, so let me -- let me back up. 11 Since they did most of the talking, you 12 talked to them? 13 A: No, I didn't speak to those persons-- 14 Q: At all? 15 A: I have no recollection of any 16 interaction with the group at large. I spoke to a woman 17 separate of -- of the group who was part of, for lack of 18 better terms, the organizing committee or the organizer 19 of -- of the rally. 20 Q: All right. And so you spoke -- that 21 was the woman in the van? 22 A: Van or truck. Van, I think, yes. 23 Q: All right. 24 A: With a child. 25 Q: You never spoke to the man and woman


1 who did most of the talking? 2 A: I have no recollection of doing so, 3 no. 4 Q: Who did you tell or communicate the 5 existence of going for an injunction to? 6 A: The woman in the van. 7 Q: Okay. And it was intended, as you 8 put it, to reassure them? That's what you said. 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: And so I take it you anticipated that 11 the woman in the van would communicate it to the rest? 12 A: There was a possibility. 13 Q: Well, I'm asking if that's what you 14 anticipated. If you were trying to reassure them, 15 presumably telling something to one person was in the 16 hopes they would pass it on, yes? 17 A: That certainly was a possibility. It 18 was to be shared, it wasn't secret knowledge. 19 Q: Right. And you're dealing with a 20 crowd that has an element of desperation; that's what you 21 told Ms. Vella? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: You're dealing with a crowd that, if 24 the situation goes unabated, may resort to violence; yes? 25 That's what you said?


1 A: Potential, yes. 2 Q: And you're dealing with a crowd that 3 hasn't nominated a leader, yes? 4 A: Repeat that, please? 5 Q: You're dealing with a crowd that 6 hasn't nominated a leader? 7 A: Hasn't? 8 Q: Yes. Has not. 9 A: I don't know that they hadn't. 10 Q: To you. 11 A: To me? 12 Q: Yeah. 13 A: Yes, I -- I didn't deal with the 14 crowd, sir. I observed them, but I did -- had no direct 15 inter -- interaction with them. 16 Q: In attempting to placate them in the 17 way you did, you'd agree with me that, despite what you 18 saw and the potential difficulties they posed, you still 19 did try to make some effect to negotiate with whomever 20 you spoke to, being the woman in the van, yes? 21 You tried to placate her concerns as best 22 you could? 23 A: Yes, that's fair. 24 Q: And you hoped that it would pass on 25 to others, even though there was no designated leader?


1 A: That's fair. 2 Q: Okay. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: And I take it there's absolutely no 7 doubt that what you heard in that time period on 8 September 6th, 1995 in the evening, what you heard 9 included concerns they had over their property, right? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: And concerns they had about their 12 family? 13 A: Specifically, I have no recollection, 14 but that's quite probable. 15 Q: And what you saw, in the numbers of 16 people building up outside the TOC, was a form of build- 17 up by people. They increased in numbers, didn't they? 18 A: No, the group was there, and I don't 19 recall anyone else coming up after I had seen the group, 20 it was just there. So they had formed -- by the time I 21 had gone from the Checkpoint Alpha back to the TOC 22 parking lot, they were there. 23 Q: And either way, you and I can agree 24 with that sense of desperation, sense of anxiety, sense 25 of concern there was both fear and tension in the air,


1 yes? 2 A: That's fair. 3 Q: Okay. You talked about reflecting on 4 this incident of September 6th, 1995, in terms of the 5 clash with the occupiers in your prepared statement. You 6 talked about how you reflect upon it routinely. Do you 7 remember talking about that in your prepared statement? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Did you ever reflect upon why that 10 level of negotiation we -- you and I just discussed that 11 you had with the residents, never happened with the 12 occupiers? 13 A: I don't know that it didn't. 14 Q: To your knowledge, as the person who 15 was second in command of CMU, to your knowledge, did it 16 happen? 17 A: When are you talking, sir? 18 Q: In the time period just -- you -- you 19 had these residents who were desperate, they had 20 pressures, tensions that night, September 6th; 800 metres 21 down the road were the occupiers. 22 Did it come to your attention that any 23 form of negotiation, of the same nature, was tried with 24 the occupiers 800 metres down the road? 25 A: When, sir?


1 Q: On the evening of September 6th, 2 1995, between the hours of 17:50 p.m. when you saw the 3 residents, and the hours of in and around 21:10, when you 4 and Wade Lacroix decided who was going to be second in 5 command and who was leading CMU. 6 Between those hours, do you -- did it come 7 to your attention that anyone tried to negotiate with the 8 occupiers? 9 A: I was not aware of any negotiations. 10 Q: Thank you. Would you agree with me 11 that what you were trying to do, as a responsible senior 12 officer, was to de-escalate the situation outside the 13 Tactical Operations Command, in and around 18:00 to 19:00 14 hours? 15 You were trying to de-escalate the 16 situation? 17 A: That's fair. 18 Q: You were trying to use your best 19 officers to communicate and calm people down and give 20 them information, yes? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: Now, do you recall, whether between 23 the hours of 17:00 and 19:30 that night -- I apologize, 24 between the hours of 17:00 and 21:30 that night, whether 25 anyone communicated to the occupiers, that if they stayed


1 in the Park there would be no clash with police? 2 A: I have no knowledge of that. 3 Q: Now you were the second in command of 4 CMU, yes? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: You had extensive training. You 7 talked to Ms. Vella about all of the crowd formations 8 that you know how to deal with for crowd control, yes? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: You know and are trained on different 11 mechanisms for crowd control, yes? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And you'd agree with me that one (1) 14 of the mechanisms for crowd control is to de-escalate? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: To your knowledge, who exercised that 17 mechanism of crowd control down by the sandy parking lot? 18 A: That night? 19 Q: Between the hours of 17:00 and 21:30? 20 A: I don't know if anyone did. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: Brief indulgence, Mr. Commissioner. 25


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: On March 24th, 1997, at the trial of 4 Nicholas Cottrelle at page 93, and this is Tab 24 of your 5 materials which is Exhibit P-1490 on these proceedings, 6 you were asked a question about what you saw when you 7 first came in the view of the sandy parking area when you 8 and your formation was marching. 9 Could you turn to page 93, please? 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Which of my 11 tabs -- 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Tab 24. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 24 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Which is Exhibit P- 15 1490. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I have 17 that. And what page again? 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Cottrelle trial, 19 page 93. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 THE WITNESS: Okay, I have it. 25


1 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 2 Q: At line 23, and I want to make sure 3 you see this. You're being cross-examined by defence 4 counsel and they ask you some questions about the march 5 down East Parkway Drive, the 800 metre march. 6 I just want you to satisfy that's the 7 context. I just don't want to -- I want -- 8 A: Top -- 9 Q: -- to home in, sir, but I also want 10 to be fair that you know what you're talking about in the 11 transcript. 12 A: Top of the page, starting -- 13 Q: Well, no -- 14 A: -- question, "ATV vehicle -- 15 Q: I just want you to see that that's 16 what's being discussed and then I'm going to direct your 17 attention, if you would please, sir, to page 93, line 20. 18 See how it says: 19 "Q: And there may also have been some 20 light pointed at you from the public 21 access side of the fence, but you're 22 not completely sure; is that a fair 23 answer? 24 Reasonable, yes." 25 Now you're discussing the march down the


1 road? 2 A: Yes. 3 Q: And the next thing you say -- the 4 next thing you're asked: 5 "Q: Now as you came into view of the 6 sandy park area, did you see anyone in 7 the sandy parking area? Was there 8 anyone standing there as you came into 9 view? 10 You answered: 11 "No, sir. 12 Q: And as your unit approached the 13 fence, was there anyone in the area 14 that you theoretically had gone to 15 clear? 16 A: No, sir, there was not." 17 When you gave that evidence, it was true? 18 A: Yes, sir. 19 Q: And it's true today? 20 A: Yes, it is. 21 Q: And that's your memory? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: So as you marched down the road, and 24 I recently just walked this again and I just want to 25 clarify this, you actually -- and -- and staff -- former


1 Staff Sergeant Wade Lacroix described this as well. 2 You kind of bend around a little bit of a 3 corner to your north, to your left, towards the water as 4 you turn in off the pavement onto the sandy parking lot, 5 correct? A: Yes. 6 Q: And so if you go a 100 metres, for 7 example, west; if you go back up East Parkway Drive you 8 actually can't see in the sandy parking lot, correct? 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: To make matters worse, of course, it 11 was night and you had no night vision, correct? 12 A: Right. 13 Q: So in any event, as you turn and do 14 get a vision of the sandy parking lot, the first thing 15 you see is nothing, correct? 16 You see no one? 17 A: I see that we're at the fence line. 18 I have no recollection, either in the time I was giving 19 evidence in this particular trial, or today, of crossing 20 the threshold between the pavement and the junction of 21 Army Camp Road and East Parkway Drive and the sandy 22 parking lot. 23 We were all of a sudden there. 24 Q: Accepting what you're telling us 25 today in 2006, would you agree that almost ten (10) years


1 ago, in March 1997, you went a little further than that? 2 You said that as you came into view of the 3 sandy parking area, you saw no one? Do you see that at 4 line 24? 5 A: I do, sir. And it's all -- 6 Q: And -- 7 A: It's all the same motion. 8 Q: So -- 9 A: So it's pretty much all the same 10 motion. We were there. 11 Q: Okay. And then do you also see where 12 you say, as your unit approached the fence, there was no 13 one there to clear? 14 Do you see that? So as it comes into view 15 and as you approach the fence, not, I appeared at the 16 fence, it's, as I came into view of the sandy parking 17 lot, I saw no one in the parking lot. 18 I just want to clarify that. That's true, 19 isn't it? 20 A: No, it's not, sir. I'm clarifying it 21 for you, if it isn't -- 22 Q: Oh. 23 A: -- clear from this. Being aware of 24 being in the sandy parking lot and being at the fence 25 line occurred almost simultaneously.


1 There had to have been people outside of 2 the Park for us to be engaged as we were, a 100 metres up 3 the roadway. The spotlights, the stones and rocks and 4 whatnot that were being thrown at us. 5 However, when we hit the fence line, when 6 we arrived at that fence line in the sandy parking lot, 7 don't forget I've got 20 feet, or 6 metres or so, 6, 7 8 metres of distance between myself and our lead group of 9 officers, the contact squad, by the time we hit that 10 area, I don't see anyone at all in -- in the public 11 access area. Everyone, from my vantage, is now in the 12 Park. 13 Q: All right -- 14 A: Does it mean they were in the -- in 15 the Park the whole time we were coming down the roadway? 16 No. 17 Q: I didn't ask you that. 18 A: I'm just clarifying that, sir. 19 Q: That's fair. But you're speculating 20 as to whether they were or weren't. I'm asking what you 21 do know. 22 A: That's what I know. They weren't all 23 in the Park when we were coming down the roadway; they 24 couldn't have been. 25 Q: Because you draw the inference from


1 the existence of people with spotlights outside of the 2 Park, (a) that they were occupiers and (b) that as 3 occupiers they were outside the Park, right? 4 A: Right. And the thrown objects and 5 the -- the stones and rocks. 6 Q: Now, at page 145 of your evidence to 7 Ms. Vella, you say, line 7: 8 "Q: Okay. Did you have any sense as 9 to what the under -- what the role of - 10 - the anticipated role of the K-9 11 officers and their dogs would be that 12 night? 13 A: They're part of the crowd 14 management training course standard. 15 It would all depend on what we were met 16 with, so much we -- that we were doing 17 was simply preparing for the worst and 18 dealing with what we encountered and 19 the manner that it was dealt to us. 20 Q: All right. 21 A: Such that if persons were back in 22 the Park the air is clear, which is 23 what we found when we first went up 24 there. That's fine." 25 What you -- and this is what you told Ms.


1 Vella a few days ago. So what you found when you first 2 went up there was a clear sandy parking lot, yes? 3 A: When we arrived at the fence, at that 4 moment in time, there was no one out into the public 5 access area. 6 Q: Okay -- 7 A: There had been prior to that moment 8 of arrival, yes. 9 Q: Because they were shining lights at 10 you; that's what -- 11 A: There's lights, there was a motorized 12 vehicle coming down the roadway at us, there was the 13 thrown objects. 14 Q: When you said there was a motorized 15 vehicle coming at you, are you saying that the motorized 16 -- you -- you described it in your evidence as an ATV, an 17 all terrain vehicle? 18 A: I believe it was, yes. 19 Q: All right. Does it -- you're not 20 suggesting, are you, that the all terrain vehicle was 21 seeking to attack you? 22 A: No, I'm not. 23 Q: All right. So when you say, Coming 24 at us, that's -- 25 A: Towards us.


1 Q: Towards us, and then it turned around 2 and left. 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And you're inferring that was an 5 occupier? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: You're inferring, basically, that any 8 activity you saw on the road, as you walked down the 9 road, whether it was lights or items being thrown or the 10 ATV, were all occupiers, correct? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: There were certainly no residents on 13 the road that night? 14 A: Not that I saw. 15 Q: No. Well, I'm curious, you -- you 16 saw lights, you couldn't see people, true? 17 A: Right. 18 Q: Right. So when you say you didn't 19 see any residents, that's -- that's -- a flashlight, a 20 resident with a flashlight, concerned that you do your 21 job that night, would be one (1) of those people on the 22 road? 23 A: That's a possibility, but I find it 24 highly unlikely. 25 Q: Okay. In any event, what I -- what


1 I'm truly to understand from you is, regardless of what 2 inferences or speculations you engage in, when you make 3 it around that corner there's nobody in the sandy parking 4 lot, are we still agreed on that? 5 A: When we arrived close to the fence 6 line, I saw no one from the Park or no occupiers in -- 7 anywhere in view, other than in the Park. 8 Q: You testified to Ms. Vella at page 9 179 of your transcript of May 11th that it was, quote, 10 "unexpected," close quotes, for you to be at the fence 11 line. Do you remember telling Ms. Vella that? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: All right. And it was unexpected 14 because somehow you left the pavement and all of a sudden 15 you were at the fence line, unintentionally, correct? 16 A: I wouldn't say unintentionally, it 17 was just unexpected. I mean, it was just -- between the 18 lights and the difficulty seeing at times, it was 19 sporadic, suddenly we're just -- we're there. 20 And I was, not taken aback but I was -- I 21 was surprised that we were suddenly at the point where 22 obviously we were going to stop, but that we had made it 23 to that point without recognizing that we had left the 24 roadway, that we had left East Parkway and the Army Camp 25 Road junction.


1 Q: And I take it the reason you use the 2 words, Failed to recognize that you had left the paved 3 road, the reason you use those words is because there was 4 some element of disorientation from the time you enter 5 the sandy parking lot to the time you're at the fence, 6 correct? 7 A: That would be part of it. And the 8 other piece of it would be the fact that I was aware the 9 area was -- had artificial lighting, and that it wasn't 10 there yet. So I mean if the artificial lighting, we 11 haven't reached it yet, we shouldn't be into that sandy 12 parking lot. 13 But the artificial lighting, as it turned 14 out, had been disabled, wasn't present that night, so 15 that added to the confusion. 16 Q: Now you described, at pages 132 to 17 133, that you actually, in your drive with Wade Lacroix, 18 in and around 21:10 to 21:45, in and around that time 19 period, during that drive you actually described the area 20 to Mr. Lacroix, correct? 21 A: Yes, sir. 22 Q: Why did you feel the need to do that? 23 A: Well, we're -- we're going down to an 24 area that I was familiar with and I didn't know how 25 familiar he was. I had worked there quite a number of


1 days, in the daylight hours as well as the night-time 2 hours the previous month, and I wanted to make sure I 3 could provide him as much of an overview of the area that 4 we were headed as I could. 5 Q: And I take it that you -- you don't 6 have a recollection of Mr. Lacroix saying to you, Well, 7 it's okay, I know this area, I'm familiar with it. 8 You don't -- you don't remember him 9 telling you that? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Okay. And during that description to 12 him, that would have been the time that you told him that 13 you thought there was artificial lighting there? 14 A: Yes, that's fair. 15 Q: So if Wade Lacroix expected 16 artificial lighting, it would have come from the 17 expectation you created, a mere hour earlier. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. You have described some events 20 when you get to the fence line, but let me ask you this: 21 Again, you're at the fence line, do you recall anyone 22 communicating to the occupiers that you are there merely 23 to clear the sandy parking lot, and if they stay in the 24 Park, there will be no problem with the police? 25 Do you recall that message being delivered


1 at the point in time you arrived at the fence line? 2 A: No. That message was not delivered 3 from us. 4 Q: Okay. On reflection, that might have 5 been an option, as you arrived at the fence line. In 6 other words, as you said, we unexpectedly got to the 7 fence line, right? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: You're there, you're the second in 10 command, yes? 11 A: Yes, sir. 12 Q: You actually are free to speak on the 13 radio and you see on the transcript, I think you 14 testified you spoke more than you thought you would, 15 right? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: So you were free to speak. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: And Wade Lacroix was free to speak, 20 as the leader of the CMU? 21 A: To who? 22 Q: To the occupiers on the other side of 23 that fence line. Were you free to speak? 24 A: No, sir. 25 Q: You were not --


1 A: That wasn't -- that wasn't our 2 function at that point. 3 Q: I didn't ask you if it was your 4 function. I wanted to know, was there something 5 retarding your ability to speak, like orders -- 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: -- orders, or voice problems, or 8 anything? I just want to know. 9 MS. KAREN JONES: Yes, Mr. Commissioner. 10 This Witness is trying to answer the question. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. I 12 know. 13 MS. KAREN JONES: And he started to give 14 an answer to a question and he gets cutoff and he's 15 going, No, I didn't ask that. He's answering the 16 question and giving the explanation he has. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's fine I -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 19 Thank you, Ms. Jones. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- I was just 21 trying to coax him -- 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think that 23 that's what's happening, so let's carry on. 24 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: All right. That's 25 fine.


1 2 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 3 Q: Please, you -- you were explaining? 4 A: If you could restate the question 5 I'll answer it, sir. 6 Q: Sure. Were you free to speak to 7 anyone at the fence line and let them know there would be 8 no clash with the police if they stayed in the Park? 9 A: It was not practical to do so by 10 virtue of the equipment we were wearing and the fact that 11 we were being pelted with throwable items, to try and 12 speak to someone from behind a plexiglass shield. 13 Even talking face to face within arm's 14 length is difficult to hear between people, let alone 15 going face to face with somebody that is assaulting you 16 by virtue of them throwing things at you. 17 So walking up and raising my shield, 18 inviting who knows what, a rock or something in my face, 19 is not a wise thing. 20 So at that point, we are the police, yes. 21 We are the authority figures in the area, yes. We did 22 not advance into the Park, we stayed outside of the Park. 23 We did not convey to them that we were -- we were not 24 coming in the Park but -- through words, but by deed we 25 did and by virtue of the fact we backed up.


1 Q: You -- you say by deed. You marched 2 down to the fence line; there was nobody in the sandy 3 parking lot and you marched right through the sandy 4 parking lot all the way to the fence line, correct? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: And you stopped at the fence line. 7 A: Right. 8 Q: And then someone read to you a 9 statement about their forefathers and these being sacred 10 burial grounds, yes? 11 A: It sounded like they were reading, 12 yes. 13 Q: All right. But you could hear the 14 words? 15 A: Yes, I could. 16 Q: Were they using a megaphone? 17 A: I don't believe so. 18 Q: They were using nothing but their own 19 voice. 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: Am I right? You were there, I 22 wasn't. 23 A: That's my recollection, yes. 24 Q: All right. So we know that at the 25 point in time you're being told these are our sacred


1 burial grounds. At the point in time you're being told 2 these are our sacred burial grounds, you are capable of 3 hearing another human, simply through his voice, and what 4 I'm asking you is: You're telling me you were incapable 5 of projecting your voice in the same way. 6 Is that fair? Is that your point? 7 A: That's fair. 8 Q: Okay. Because you'd agree with me 9 that that might be the point you say, Sir, no one is 10 going in the Park, if you stay in the Park, there will be 11 no clash with police; that could have been the point in 12 time you actually addressed your remarks -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- to the person 15 talking to you. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Calm down, 17 calm down. He's already said no one did it. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 20 Q: But that would have been opportune 21 time to do it, agreed? 22 A: One could view that that way, yes. 23 Q: Okay. And the reason one could view 24 it that way is there's an air of reality to that, true? 25 A: It's certainly a possibility, but


1 don't forget, you make it sound as if that was the only 2 thing happening at the time, and it wasn't. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 6 Q: And I accept that. We have to have 7 context, right? 8 A: Yes, sir. 9 Q: And the context includes some 10 projectiles being thrown at that point? 11 A: Yes. A flaming object as well and -- 12 Q: One (1) flaming object -- 13 A: -- people -- people -- 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: He's still 15 trying to finish. 16 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I apologize. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I know 18 you -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Sorry. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Carry on. 21 THE WITNESS: People cursing and yelling 22 above and beyond what the one (1) person was with the -- 23 what I've described as a scripted speech. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER:


1 Q: But you could hear the scripted 2 speech? 3 A: Yes, sir, I could. And I could also 4 hear lots of other things, too. 5 Q: You said they would understand by 6 action we wouldn't go into the Park. That was the -- the 7 gist of what you testified to? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Right. Sir, by the time anyone could 10 understand anything, seconds passed and you were engaging 11 with them. Am I not right, I mean -- 12 A: That's not correct. 13 Q: No? Many minutes passed between the 14 time you were at the fence line and the time you engaged 15 with the first occupier? Many minutes passed? 16 A: I don't know if it would be minutes, 17 but if you would like me to recount my recollections, I 18 will. 19 Q: Well, I'm just asking the lapse of 20 time between the time you were at the fence line and the 21 time of interaction with the first occupier who comes 22 through the turnstile. 23 Can you help me with the time that lapsed 24 between those two (2) events? 25 A: The turnstile happened early. In


1 terms of when we went there, I can time line it according 2 to the transcript or the radio transmissions quite 3 nicely, if the times are available to me. 4 That's the accurate way to do it. 5 Q: Can we agree on this that we're still 6 talking seconds rather than many minutes between the 7 time -- 8 A: I wouldn't agree seconds, sir, no. 9 Q: Okay. But it would be a matter of 10 minutes? 11 A: That's fair. 12 Q: Okay. 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: Did you or Mr. Lacroix ever discuss 17 amongst yourselves or with others, the prospect of 18 needing to communicate with the occupiers when you got 19 down to the sandy parking lot? 20 Did that logistics issue ever arise? 21 A: No. 22 Q: Would you agree that one(1) of the 23 options that exists is not -- is -- is first, an example, 24 is a bull horn, right? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: Another option that exists is the 2 usage of amplification features on cruisers? 3 A: That's available, yes. 4 Q: And again, none of those things were 5 discussed? 6 A: Not that I recall. I'm reasonably 7 sure they weren't. 8 Q: Okay. You have in front of you or 9 should have in front of you, a t-shirt, is that right? 10 A: Yes, sir. 11 Q: Could you put it in front of you, 12 please? 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: Could you hold up the logo, please? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: Now, you'd agree with me that that 21 logo depicts the TRU symbol breaking an arrow, correct? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: That logo depicts the sharp end of 24 the TRU symbol breaking the arrow in half, yes? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: In addition to it depicting the TRU 2 symbol breaking the arrow in half, the base upon which 3 the arrow is broken in half, is an anvil; yes? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And the anvil has the ERT letters on 6 it. 7 A: Yes, it does. 8 Q: Would you agree with me that a 9 reasonable interpretation of this is that TRU is breaking 10 an arrow with the assistance of ERT? 11 A: That could be an interpretation, yes. 12 Q: Well, all right. This is why you're 13 here, this is your t-shirt? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: Help me. Give me another 16 interpretation other than this depicting a TRU symbol 17 breaking an arrow with the assistance of ERT. 18 What other inference should I draw from 19 this symbol? 20 A: That's the literal inference. 21 Q: All right. 22 A: I -- I can't deny that. 23 Q: Okay. So that is the literal 24 inference? 25 A: Yes, sir.


1 Q: And would you agree with me that 2 above TRU breaking an arrow with the assistance of ERT, 3 is Project Maple '95? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And would you agree with me therefore 6 that the literal inference from this logo is that, among 7 other things, Project Maple '95 reflects the TRU team or 8 teams breaking an arrow with the assistance of the ERT 9 team or teams? 10 Would you agree that that's the literal 11 inference I draw from that logo? 12 A: You could but that's not my 13 interpretation. 14 Q: All right. Now, let's back up 15 because we -- we're first at the logos and you agree that 16 the logos interacting with the arrow that way was the 17 literal interpretation, agreed? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. And just so I know how far you 20 and I agree together by that you agreed with me that the 21 TRU team symbol was breaking the arrow with the 22 assistance of the ERT symbol? 23 You and I agreed on that? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: All right. Now, here's the part I


1 just want to clarify. You'd agree with me that the point 2 of the TRU team logo is to reflect the TRU team or TRU 3 teams, correct? 4 A: Okay. You're talking -- the point? 5 Just -- 6 Q: Not the point, I'm asking you: Do 7 you see the TRU team logo? 8 A: Yes, I do, sir. 9 Q: You've seen it before? 10 A: I have. 11 Q: You're a former member of TRU team? 12 A: No. 13 Q: No? Sorry, that's my 14 misunderstanding. I apologize. Lots of witnesses. 15 You've seen the TRU team symbol before? 16 A: I have. 17 Q: You've seen it emblazoned on TRU team 18 officers that you've worked with? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: So you know the point of a TRU team 21 logo is to depict a TRU team member? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: Thank you. And so you and I can 24 agree that this logo is supposed to be reflective of TRU 25 teams, yes?


1 A: TRU and ERT. 2 Q: Well, we're not at ERT yet, we're 3 just at TRU, all right? 4 A: That's right, yes. 5 Q: Yes, Thank you. Now, ERT stands for 6 what? 7 ERT stands for what? 8 A: Emergency Response Team. 9 Q: And you'd agree with me that the ERT 10 as far as you knew in the literal interpretation of this 11 symbol is meant to stand for members of the Emergency 12 Response Team? 13 A: Correct. 14 Q: Now, the part that you and I 15 apparently disagreed with is when you agreed with me that 16 the logo was breaking the arrow with the assistance of 17 the ERT log you then went on to say but that doesn't mean 18 that this meant to say that the TRU teams were breaking 19 this arrow with the assistance of the ERT teams? 20 You didn't agree with that, correct? Do 21 you want to reconsider that? 22 The literal interpretation I put it to 23 you is that the TRU teams are breaking the arrow with the 24 assistance of the ERT teams, correct? 25 A: That's an assumption you could draw


1 from that, yes. 2 Q: Well, I'm sorry, sir, I'm going to be 3 a bit greedy about this and ask you to agree with me that 4 this is in fact the literal interpretation of this logo, 5 not simply an assumption, the literal interpretation of 6 this logo is that the TRU teams are breaking the arrow 7 with the assistance of the ERT teams? 8 A: Sir, I wasn't involved in the design 9 of this. I -- I don't know the person that designed it, 10 what their intent was. 11 Q: But looking at it this is an item you 12 purchased? 13 A: I did. 14 Q: In September 1995? 15 A: I don't recall exactly when but it 16 was in '95. 17 Q: Well, in fact you testified to Ms. 18 Vella you thought you purchased it in advance of 19 September 30th, 1995, correct? 20 A: That's wrong. 21 Q: I apologize. That's what I 22 understood was the gist of your evidence from reading it 23 in the transcript. 24 Can you clarify that for me? 25 A: Yes. My last working day in that


1 area was the long weekend of October. 2 Q: All right. 3 A: So that's almost another two (2) 4 weeks later. 5 Q: Fair enough. So it would be -- 6 A: So it was some time before I left. 7 I'm reasonably that I would have had this by then. 8 Q: Therefore we can assume in the six 9 (6) weeks that followed the death of Dudley George you 10 would have purchased this T-shirt? 11 A: Probably, yes. 12 Q: Okay. And you purchased it and have 13 had it up until 2006 when you brought it here? 14 A: Yes, sir. 15 Q: Now, you said, Well, I didn't design 16 this. That's true but it's yours, it's your personal 17 property, yes? 18 A: Yes, sir. 19 Q: So I'm asking you now, sir, would you 20 assist me on the literal interpretation to be made to 21 this? 22 Would you agree with me, leaving out what 23 the designers intended, would you agree with me that the 24 literal interpretation is that TRU team members are 25 breaking this arrow with the assistance of ERT team


1 members? 2 A: Well, it depends what your reality 3 is, sir, that's not my reality; that's not -- 4 Q: Okay. 5 A: -- my interpretation. 6 Q: Fair enough. Now we go to the next 7 step. What is your interpretation of this logo? 8 A: Well, firstly when I -- when I got 9 the shirt I don't even -- I can't say when I recognized 10 that there was an arrow being broken here and I believe 11 as I indicated in evidence in chief I don't even recall 12 seeing the shirt before I paid for it and that's a common 13 thing in -- in different major projects. I -- 14 Q: Sir, you don't recall -- 15 A: To me -- 16 Q: I missed that last -- 17 A: Major projects, major -- 18 Q: You don't -- 19 A: -- major events. 20 Q: I missed the answer that's all. 21 A: I'm sorry. 22 Q: It's my fault. You don't recall 23 seeing it in advance of paying for it, is that -- 24 A: Yeah, I don't recall -- 25 Q: -- what I understand?


1 A: -- if I actually saw it. I -- I may 2 well have paid for it in advance which is quite the 3 common thing. Who -- who's interested in a T-shirt? I 4 am. What's it going to cost? Here's the money. 5 I can't be certain which way it went but 6 more times than not the money's upfront. But regardless 7 of that, I did buy the t-shirt; there's no argument of 8 that -- that fact. 9 To me this -- this shirt represents 10 something personal, something significant; an event that 11 myself and the people that I -- I work with, that I put 12 my life in their hands with, survived an evening that was 13 traumatic for everyone. 14 And it was never intended to be 15 representation or represented as something with malice 16 and hatred and racism as you've used the words earlier, 17 the racism piece; that's certainly not my intent. It 18 never was and it isn't today. 19 To me it's a personal item that reflects 20 that I survived, as did my co-workers, a very significant 21 confrontation and that it was done with -- it was -- it 22 was an effort between the Emergency Response Team members 23 supported by TRU that we managed to overcome a very 24 significant confrontation. 25 And a bit of a bonding thing with the


1 group. We were a relatively new team at the time. 2 Having been trained in -- about two (2) years' previous 3 and with a -- with the -- the piece with the crowd 4 management being trained the previous year. 5 So I -- I know and I fully respect that 6 this would be seen by persons outside of the emergency 7 response team and TRU as being a negative. To me it is 8 not. 9 I've lost a brother, I've lost a step- 10 brother. I've lost a stepsister through accidents, not 11 by the police but through accidents. I know the pain of 12 losing siblings and in no way was this shirt in my heart, 13 reflective of that, of -- of something malicious in that 14 matter. 15 It -- to me, was something significant in 16 my life. It was an event that I've said on the record 17 and to others, that I'll live with through the rest of my 18 life and I'm sure the officers that -- that were there 19 will as well. 20 It was -- it was a night that I survived; 21 it was a night that officers I worked with, we worked 22 together, and but for the grace of God, more people could 23 have been hurt, more people could have been killed. 24 And as I said again on Thursday, both 25 officers and occupiers. I'm thankful that's not the


1 case. And I'm thankful that -- that I survived 2 relatively unscathed, and that's -- that's what this 3 shirt means to me. 4 Q: You said all of those things, but 5 what you didn't address is what the symbols literally 6 mean on the face of the t-shirt; that is you went on 7 quite eloquently to express your memories of the incident 8 and how you feel about the t-shirt now. 9 But what I put to you that you disagreed 10 with and I'm now going back to it because my clients feel 11 entitled to pursue this with you -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just ask the 13 question -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough, you're 15 quite right. I'm sorry -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Go ahead. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- Mr. 18 Commissioner. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Go ahead. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I withdraw that. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 23 Q: The literal interpretation of this 24 logo is that TRU team members involved in project Maple 25 '95 are breaking an arrow --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 2 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- with the 3 assistance of ERT team members -- 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- and you said to 6 me that's a possibility -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's 8 one(1) inference -- 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- but that's not-- 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- that 11 could be drawn. 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 14 Q: Right. Now I want to know the other 15 literal interpretation of this. What else could this 16 logo mean? 17 A: And I explained that to you, from my 18 perspective, it means something different. 19 Q: But you can't use the symbols to help 20 me with it, can you? 21 A: I believe I just did. 22 Q: You showed me how this broken arrow 23 is -- is respectful of Dudley George's memory? 24 A: I -- 25 Q: Did you show me that?


1 A: No, sir, I didn't. 2 Q: Did you show me how the broken arrow 3 in any way shows the OPP's respect for First Nations 4 people? 5 A: I understand how -- how this is 6 offensive. 7 Q: Are you offended by it? 8 A: I don't wear this shirt in public. 9 Q: Sir, would you agree -- 10 A: I understand how it's offensive -- 11 Q: -- with me that that's not much of a 12 test if you do things in secret that you wouldn't do in 13 public. That's not much of a test as to whether you're 14 offended. 15 Would you agree with that? 16 A: It's a possibility. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 20 Q: All right, so going back again, I ask 21 you quietly. Are you offended by this logo? 22 A: I'm not offended by it, because I 23 don't take the same literal meaning of it as you do. 24 Q: Thank you. Now, what I want to 25 understand is this.


1 You had this t-shirt and your intention 2 was, as you put it in your evidence, to hold on to it 3 because you knew that the Commission might want it, yes? 4 A: I knew that was -- it was an issue, 5 yes. 6 Q: All right. And I take it that you 7 don't have any great affinity for the t-shirt at this 8 stage. 9 A: No. It's -- the meaning of it that I 10 expressed has been sullied. 11 Q: All right. And so you have no great 12 attachment to this t-shirt anymore? 13 A: Less. 14 Q: All right. Would you have any 15 objection to it being filed as an exhibit in these 16 proceedings? 17 A: No, I would not. 18 Q: All right. So I -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't 20 think it needs to be. I don't think it -- 21 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I -- I with 22 great respect, Mr. Commissioner -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I've got a 24 logo here and I'm satisfied with it. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I know, but I -


1 - may I address on that without -- I don't want to be 2 seen to be arguing with you, Mr. Commissioner, but I'd 3 like to address you on that. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Sure. 5 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Mr. Commissioner, 6 the Witness has -- says he has no objection to it being 7 filed, number 1. Number 2 -- 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. Well 9 perhaps there's no problem. Do you have a problem with 10 it being filed or do you? If you don't, then we'll file 11 it? Does anybody? 12 I don't think it's necessary that's all. 13 I have the logo. I know what it looks like, we've seen 14 it. 15 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, just 16 on point. You have not only the logo, but you have 17 pictures of the t-shirt, both the front and the back. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 19 MS. KAREN JONES: And for the purpose of 20 you having the information before you, that would be 21 helpful for you, I take it that you have it. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It doesn't 23 help me to have the actual t-shirt. 24 MS. KAREN JONES: It doesn't help you to 25 have the t-shirt --


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And I 2 don't -- 3 MS. KAREN JONES: -- and Mr. 4 Commissioner, that seems to me that that's probably the 5 answer to the question. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: May I reply to 7 that, please? 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, sir. 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I respectfully 10 submit this. There is no privacy issue because of what 11 the Witness has said. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: The issue of filing 14 of exhibits has been a process whereby we do it if it's 15 relevant. It's clearly relevant. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: There has been a 18 great loss of time and productivity in my respectful 19 submission by some of us who prepare on these issues 20 because certain items didn't exist before. 21 This exists, we have it in front of us, 22 it's -- it's not going anywhere if we make it an exhibit. 23 I just don't see the downside with respect. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm not 25 sure. I don't it's that significant. I agree with you


1 it may be no problem. You want to put it in an 2 envelope -- 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- and put 5 it away? 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Yes. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you have 8 anything to say? 9 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: If -- if there's no 10 problem making an exhibit, then I don't have much to say. 11 But -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I want to 13 make sure. 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- but it may be 15 important for my purposes for this be to an exhibit so -- 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, you're 17 going to have an opportunity to use it in your 18 examination. 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: No, no, I 20 appreciate that. But then as a result of some of the 21 questions I may ask, I anticipate it might be important 22 then that the actual 23 t-shirt be an exhibit. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Ms. Vella, 25 do you have any objections?


1 MS. SUSAN VELLA: In light of the 2 Witness' answer, I don't have any objection to the filing 3 of this 4 t-shirt. I agree with your observations that we have 5 what we need in terms of the photographs of it, but I 6 don't have an objection -- 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes we can 8 put it in an -- 9 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- in these 10 circumstances. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- envelope 12 and file it as an exhibit. 13 I want to hear from the OPP. Ms. Tuck- 14 Jackson...? 15 MS. ANDREA TUCK-JACKSON: A moment's 16 indulgence, Mr. Commissioner. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 MS. SUSAN VELLA: The only concern that's 21 been expressed to me by the OPP's counsel is that in the 22 event that they would require access to this t-shirt as 23 part of the -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Investigation. 25 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- investigation that's


1 been launched and they may have to seek a release of the 2 exhibit from the Commission. 3 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: We'll all -- we'll 4 all consent. 5 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Well, I don't know if 6 we'll all -- all consent but -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm sure we'll all 8 consent. That's not an issue. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, if and 10 when it's needed, we'll deal with it. I think we -- 11 MS. SUSAN VELLA: We'll -- we'll -- I 12 guess we'll make that -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- could 14 make it available -- 15 MS. SUSAN VELLA: -- when it comes. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- to the 17 OPP if they need it for their investigation. Are you 18 finished on the t-shirt because -- 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, I'm not. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- I gather 21 that there are going to be other questions on this and 22 I'm not prepared to have -- 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- everybody 25 cross-examine on the same basis and the same issues


1 regarding this t-shirt. It's important and you've done a 2 fairly comprehensive job. 3 If you're not finished yet, I want you to 4 finish. But I just am sort of alerting everybody that 5 you're doing it. You're up first and you're doing this 6 cross-examination. So carry on. 7 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Just before Mr. 8 Falconer -- 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: It's a weighty 10 burden. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 12 Yes...? 13 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Just before he carries 14 on, it might be actually convenient so we don't have a -- 15 a difficulty later, to know whether anyone -- any of the 16 parties will object to the Commission's releasing of this 17 t-shirt if requested by the OPP for purposes of its 18 investigation. 19 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No objection. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. Falconer 21 has said that he thinks that would be no problem. If 22 anybody has a sense that that might be a problem with it, 23 please indicate it. 24 I didn't think so. So we can put it in an 25 envelope and make it an exhibit.


1 THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P-1497, Your 2 Honour. 3 4 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1497: T-shirt marked, "Project 5 Maple '95-ERT". 6 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I have an envelope 8 here for the clerk that Ms. Vella's lent me for the t- 9 shirt. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 14 Q: Now I wanted to confirm with you and 15 hopefully we'll be able to make the -- the logo an 16 exhibit in a moment, but Mr. Millar's going to try to get 17 up on screen the logo that is the TRU team logo on its 18 own and I want you to just confirm whether that's your 19 understanding of the TRU team logo. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think he 21 already has. 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well -- 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I believe he 24 already has. 25 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: No, the rea -- I'm


1 doing this for a reason. 2 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 3 MR. DERRY MILLAR: This is the logo as 4 taken from the shirt that has been filed, the photograph 5 of which has been filed as Exhibit -- I believe it's 6 Exhibit P-451 but Mr. -- Constable Shawn Evans and 7 Constable Ed Kodis created this image and sent it to me 8 this morning. And so that's what it is, it's the exact 9 logo taken from Exhibit P-451, the shirt. 10 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. And 11 with that I -- I'd ask that this picture, once we're able 12 to create a hardcopy, if an exhibit number could be 13 reserved for that, this piece of clothing? 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 15 16 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 17 Q: And in particular you'd agree with me 18 that, Sergeant Hebblethwaite, that in essence that TRU 19 team logo with the point on the bottom of it is precisely 20 the item that's breaking the arrow? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: Thank you. 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, we will have -- 24 I've asked for prints to be -- a print to be made and so 25 we should get an exhibit number for it now.


1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 2 THE REGISTRAR: P-1498, Your Honour. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: P-1498. 4 THE REGISTRAR: Yes, sir. 5 6 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1498: Reserved. 7 8 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I have a few more 9 questions about the issue of the T-shirt, and then I have 10 some questions about the investigation as it pertained to 11 Sergeant Hebblethwaite. So I just wanted to -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And you've 13 got about ten (10) or fifteen (15) minutes left in your 14 two (2) hours. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's right. 16 That's -- that's what I would have guessed. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 18 19 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 20 Q: First of all, I want to understand 21 something because you broached it and I find it very 22 difficult to broach with you, sir, because it's your 23 personal life, but you made reference to a loss of loved 24 ones; siblings. 25 And to be honest, sir, I have six (6)


1 siblings and thank God they're all alive so I don't mean 2 to intrude in your personal life, all right? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: But you made reference to that and 5 how difficult that was for you. Do you remember talking 6 about that? 7 A: I do. 8 Q: Would you agree with me that under no 9 circumstances would you ever have found it acceptable for 10 anyone to have kept a memento or a souvenir as a t-shirt 11 of whatever circumstances arose in the loss of your loved 12 one; that would never be acceptable? 13 A: There is intent; what the intent is. 14 I'd have to see the item. 15 Q: Fair enough. I would also put it to 16 you that in -- you said there were numerous operations 17 involving the police where mementos are created in the 18 form of t-shirts? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: And you have numerous ones? 21 A: I do. 22 Q: And now with the highest regard for 23 those officers who have fallen in the line of duty, 24 because I don't mean any denigration of their 25 contribution or their memories, have you ever heard of a


1 t-shirt being created in respect of an event where an 2 officer lost their life? 3 A: Well, I -- I have T-shirts from 9/11 4 where many officers died and fire department personnel 5 and civilians. 6 Q: You were personally involved in 9-11? 7 A: I was not. 8 Q: All right. 9 A: I was personally involved in a 10 Kosovo, UN, peacekeeping mission. I have shirts from 11 there. 12 Q: I'm talking about your involvement as 13 an OPP officer. Could you please -- I'm asking have you 14 ever heard as an OPP officer of the creating of a t-shirt 15 in relation to an event where a fellow OPP officer fell 16 to their death in the line of duty? 17 A: As an OPP, no. 18 Q: Now, this arrow, the arrow that's 19 broken, would you agree with me that it is a non police 20 symbol, that is the police do not use this arrow as a 21 symbol for any of its operations? Would you agree with 22 that? 23 A: I'd agree. 24 Q: Would you agree with me that the 25 literal interpretation of this arrow is it's to reflect


1 First Nations communities? 2 A: That certainly is the obvious 3 interpretation. 4 Q: Do you know of any other 5 interpretation to the arrow? 6 A: I once suggested, from my vantage, 7 that it represents all of the First Nations. To me it 8 represented those persons that we had this confrontation 9 with on the night of September 6th. 10 Q: Fair enough. So this arrow to you 11 represented the occupiers? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: And the breaking of the arrow 14 represented the breaking of the occupiers symbolically, 15 correct? 16 A: In simple words, yes. 17 Q: I repeat my question to you: Do you 18 not find that offensive? 19 A: I understand how it -- it is 20 offensive today, and if I haven't said it clearly, and I 21 believe I have, I am sorry to Mr. George that this has 22 been taken this way, I really am. 23 It wasn't my interpretation of it then, 24 and it wasn't -- it's not the way I felt about the shirt 25 or feel about the shirt; even 'til today it doesn't


1 represent that to me, sir, and I don't know if I can say 2 that much more clearly. 3 Q: No, you have, you've fairly answered 4 my question. I'm going to ask for Exhibit P-1051 and 5 Exhibit P-1052 to be put in front of the witness, please. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Now, what's being put before you are 10 what is termed, somewhat ironically, the discipline 11 records. They rep -- they actually are investigation 12 records in respect of what has come to be known as the 13 mugs and t-shirts incidents, all right? 14 A: Okay. 15 Q: Have you ever reviewed exhibits P- 16 1051 and P-1052? 17 A: No, I have not. 18 Q: All right. The best assistance I can 19 have for you to -- for identifying one or two (2) of the 20 parties involved, is if you could take P-1051, which is 21 Volume I, and turn to Tab 17. 22 I don't know if there's an extra copy for 23 the Commissioner. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, we'll 25 see if I need it as you go through it.


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't have 4 a copy in front of me, but we'll see if I need it as you 5 proceed, Mr. Falconer. 6 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. I 7 think we have a clean copy available, that's why I was 8 going to -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Okay. 10 11 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 12 Q: Now, if you look at 17, you'll see 13 it's a document dated January 8th, 1996. Do you see 14 that? 15 A: I do. 16 Q: And if you go to the end of that Tab, 17 you will see a -- there should be a signature page. I'm 18 now missing it. I apologize. 19 It's page 19. it was added on after it 20 was missing from the original. 21 Do you have a page 19 in there? 22 23 (BRIEF PAUSE) 24 25 Q: Can you find a page 19?


1 A: I'm looking. 2 3 (BRIEF PAUSE) 4 5 A: 17, 18, 19 -- 6 Q: Thank you. 7 A: -- at the back, yes. 8 Q: Do you see the ref -- the signature 9 by D.W. Adkin, Staff Sergeant? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: All right. Staff Sergeant Adkin was 12 basically the one who was primarily in charge of 13 investigating the mugs and t-shirts incidences, all 14 right? 15 A: Okay. 16 Q: Now, the issues arose in October 17 through to November of 1995, and ultimately an 18 investigation was conducted with a report being produced 19 in January of 1996, all right? 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: I'm just telling you that. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: That's the chronology from the 24 records. What I want to understand from you is that -- 25 first of all, is it fair to say -- is it fair to say that


1 you weren't away out of the country, or something, 2 between October 1995 and January 1996, were you? 3 A: No, sir. 4 Q: You were the -- you were intensely 5 involved as a senior ERT member, yes? For the incident, 6 I mean, the Ipperwash Park operation. You were a senior 7 ERT member and you were intensely involved, including 8 being second in command of the crowd management unit? 9 A: That's not accurate. I was obviously 10 intensely involved the night of the 6th, but prior to 11 that I was one of a number of assistant team leaders. 12 Q: All right. And can you think of any 13 reason why the investigator checking out mugs and t- 14 shirts, and the memorabilia in general, wouldn't speak to 15 you, off the top of your head? 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just before 17 you answer. 18 Yes, Ms. Jones...? 19 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, how 20 can this Witness speculate on what somebody else is doing 21 or how they're doing it? 22 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, I'm happy to 23 help My Friend. The way that this Witness can, so-called 24 speculate, is to not speculate. 25 I'm not looking for speculation. This


1 Witness may have personal knowledge of a reason Staff 2 Sergeant Adkin chose not to speak to him, and he can 3 share that with us, or he can tell us he has no idea. 4 But he may have personal knowledge as to a reason that 5 Staff Sergeant Adkin did not -- 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well -- 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: -- interview him. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But the way 9 you asked the question in the first instance may have 10 called for speculation. 11 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you put 13 it that way -- 14 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Would that -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- then 16 there won't be any speculation. 17 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Fair enough. Do 18 you have -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If there is 20 any personal reason then it may be relevant. 21 22 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 23 Q: Do you have any personal knowledge as 24 to why Staff Sergeant Adkin would not have interviewed 25 you?


1 A: No, sir. 2 Q: Do you have any personal knowledge as 3 to why Staff Sergeant Adkin would not have requested the 4 t-shirt of you? 5 A: I was never contacted by Detective 6 Staff Sergeant Adkin or Staff Sergeant Adkin. 7 Q: You were never contacted by anyone 8 investigating the mugs and t-shirts, correct? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: Now, we have heard from a number of 11 different officers. Just to give you a list... 12 13 (BRIEF PAUSE) 14 15 Q: We've heard from Sergeant -- I 16 apologize, I've mixed up my notes. 17 We've heard from a Michael John Dougan. 18 Do -- do you know Dougan? 19 A: The name's familiar, I can't -- I 20 can't put a face to it. 21 Q: He actually testified on April 3rd, 22 2006. And to be honest, Mr. Commissioner, while I wasn't 23 in the room I think all of us missed it. On April 3rd, 24 2006 at page 154, he testified about a Project Maple t- 25 shirt that had an anvil with an arrow, April 3rd, 2006,


1 page 153 to 154. 2 And he wasn't interviewed. Nor was the 3 t-shirt seized from him. I just want to understand 4 something about this t-shirt that is now Exhibit P... 5 THE REGISTRAR: P-1497. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: 1497. 7 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 1497. 8 9 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 10 Q: I want to understand something, 11 is there something special about this t-shirt, where it 12 was a limited edition only given to a few officers or 13 anything like that, that you know of? 14 A: I have no idea, sir. 15 Q: All right. So you didn't have any 16 impression, at the time you were receiving this t-shirt, 17 that it was only for you or a select few officers? 18 A: I -- I wasn't aware, until quite 19 recently, there was more than one (1) version. 20 Q: You thought your version was the only 21 one circulating? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And so it's again said that you 24 didn't think there was something special about this one, 25 correct?


1 A: That's correct. 2 Q: You have had training in conducting 3 investigations, yes? As a police officer? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Did you work Criminal Investigations 6 at all as a police officer? 7 A: I have done criminal investigations, 8 yes. 9 Q: Did you work Professional Standards 10 as a police officer? 11 A: No, I have not. 12 Q: All right. As a criminal 13 investigator, if -- if you wanted to analyse or 14 investigate items, would one (1) of the options you might 15 choose would be to seize the items? 16 A: If there's authority to do so, yes. 17 Q: All right. And as a criminal 18 investigator, or any kind of investigator, would you 19 agree with me that one (1) of your obligations, in 20 respect of an investigation, is to interview relevant 21 witnesses? 22 A: That's fair, yes. 23 Q: Would you agree with me, just on the 24 surface of it, as the second in command with the Crowd 25 Management Unit who was in possession of a T-shirt, you


1 would be a relevant witness on the issue of the existence 2 of these T-shirts; just on the face of it? 3 A: On the face of it, yes. 4 Q: Now, I want to take you to, very 5 briefly, some conclusions by Staff Sergeant Adkin, it's 6 at that Tab 17. 7 If you turn to page 15 -- could you turn 8 to page 15? 9 A: I have it. 10 Q: Under title, Investigation: 11 "The T-shirts, see Appendix D, are 12 black in colour and on the left side 13 chest area is an OPP shoulder insignia 14 with an 'ERT' written on one (1) side 15 and 'TRU' on the other. The top has 16 writings 'Ipperwash' and at the bottom 17 is a which feather." 18 So you see how that's describing a 19 different T-shirt? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: All right. Now, going further down 22 third paragraph: 23 "Investigation revealed that the shirts 24 were produced at [it doesn't -- it's 25 blacked out]."


1 It states that: 2 "A member of the OPP Constable had made 3 an arrangement to purchase a hundred 4 and fifty (150) T-shirts from the 5 company. On September 21, '95, details 6 of the artwork were finalized from a 7 rough drawing." 8 Do you see that paragraph? 9 A: I do. 10 Q: "On October 28th, '95 I interviewed 11 Constable [blanked out] detachment with 12 respect to the production of the T- 13 shirts." 14 Third to last line, quote: 15 "After deciding on a couple of tasteful 16 logos he decided to check with certain 17 individuals whose opinion he thought 18 would be helpful, so as not to offend 19 anyone." 20 Do you see that? 21 A: I do. 22 Q: "He spoke Constable [blank] and a 23 First Nations person as well as 24 Detective Sergeant Mark Wright, who 25 were two (2) people he knew had close


1 ties to the Native community. 2 As a result he decided upon the design 3 because he felt it was tasteful, non 4 offensive and projected a positive 5 image. 6 [blank] was shown two (2) designs, one 7 with an arrow, one with a feather. 8 He stated the one with the arrow was 9 offensive but he was not personally 10 offended by the feather." 11 Now, is it apparent to you that Staff 12 Sergeant Adkin is focussing on a different T-shirt than 13 the one you purchased? 14 A: It appears that way, yes. 15 Q: Would you agree with me that his 16 conclusion can be found at page 17 under, Findings? 17 Last paragraph: 18 "I find that although there were people 19 offended by the shirts, care and 20 professionalism were used to attempt to 21 ensure that people were not offended by 22 the shirts, and the officer's sole 23 purpose was to supply a memento. 24 Unfortunately, the sensitivity of the 25 situation did not allow for this


1 interpretation." 2 Now looking at this logo, would you agree 3 that care -- showing a TRU symbol breaking the arrow over 4 an ERT anvil, is not care? Would you agree that doesn't 5 reflect care or compassion? 6 A: It depends on the individual, sir. 7 Q: I'm asking you, sir. Would you agree 8 that showing a TRU symbol breaking an anv -- breaking an 9 arrow over an anvil marked by ERT, does not show care or 10 compassion? 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I'm 12 sorry. I -- 13 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: My Friend's not 14 rising. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No, that's 16 fine, that's fine. 17 18 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 19 Q: Would you agree with that? 20 A: That wasn't my interpretation, as 21 I've already stated. But I can certainly understand how 22 that is seen that way, yes. 23 Q: Now to be fair to Staff Sergeant 24 Adkin, he didn't have this T-shirt, right? 25 A: It appears that way.


1 Q: He never interviewed you. 2 A: No, he didn't. 3 Q: You'd agree with me that 4 investigations, with only a portion of the evidence, can 5 be tainted by their deficiencies. If an investigator 6 goes out and only finds a portion of the evidence they're 7 suppose to investigate, that may call into question their 8 conclusions; would you agree with that? 9 A: Possibly, yes. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I take it 11 you're just about finished. 12 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: That's correct. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 14 15 (BRIEF PAUSE) 16 17 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 18 Q: There's a passage I want to ask you 19 about in relation to the mugs, and I just need your 20 evidence on this, please, sir. 21 If you turn to page 12 you'll find the 22 reference to the mugs. Page 12 of Tab 17. So if you 23 stay at page -- at that same tab and turn to page 12. 24 A: I have it. 25 Q: Under, Investigation:


1 "The coffee mugs that had been produced 2 were of two (2) varieties. The first 3 of which only twelve (12) were made 4 showed an OPP shoulder flash with an 5 arrow placed behind it and the words 6 'Ipperwash '95'. The second version 7 removed the arrow from behind it." 8 Do you see that? 9 A: I do. 10 Q: "Mr. Cloud feels that the mugs were 11 offensive towards First Nations 12 persons, firstly, because of the arrow; 13 a cowboy and Indian mentality. 14 And secondly, that it was a product 15 made to represent the death of a person 16 and that is not right. 17 Mr. Cloud had voiced his opinion to 18 several other people and their 19 existence came to the attention of two 20 (2) members of the Dudley George 21 Family." 22 Now that reference to a cowboy and Indian 23 mentality coming from the arrow; do you see that? 24 A: I see the reference, yes. 25 Q: Would you agree with me that that


1 would be equally applicable to the arrow on your T-shirt? 2 A: Again, sir, I can appreciate how it 3 could be viewed that way. 4 Q: Fair enough. And when you testified, 5 from your written statement, as you did, that you were 6 deeply saddened by the death of Dudley George, were you 7 thinking in terms of cowboys and Indians? 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, I -- 9 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I'm asking a 10 question. I'm asking a question and I'll repeat it so 11 that My Friends can object and I'll make argument on it. 12 When you said you -- 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm just not 14 sure how helpful that question is. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Well, the 16 Aboriginal community is entitled through my client or 17 others -- 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Please, Mr. 19 Falconer. No speeches, ask the questions. 20 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: I don't -- thank 21 you. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. JULIAN FALCONER: 24 Q: When you testified that you were 25 deeply saddened by the death of Dudley George, was it in


1 the context of viewing it as cowboys and Indians? 2 A: Absolutely not, sir; that's 3 offensive. 4 Q: But you'd agree with me that that is 5 an easy inference to draw from that logo? 6 A: By someone with that bent, yes. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: That concludes my questions. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 12 Mr. Falconer. 13 I think this would be a good point to 14 break for lunch. 15 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Oh, I apologize. 16 The -- the photo of TRU was made an exhibit? 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think -- 18 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It was or 20 wasn't? 21 MS. SUSAN VELLA: It was, I reserved a 22 number. 23 MR. JULIAN FALCONER: Thank you. I just 24 wanted to make sure I -- I didn't -- 25 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you.


1 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry stands 2 adjourned until 2:00 p.m. 3 4 --- Upon recessing at 1:04 p.m. 5 --- Upon resuming at 2:03 p.m. 6 7 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 8 resumed. Please be seated. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 10 afternoon, Mr. Rosenthal. 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Afternoon, Mr. 12 Commissioner. 13 14 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 15 Q: Good afternoon, officer. 16 A: Good afternoon, sir. 17 Q: My name is Peter Rosenthal, I'm 18 Counsel for some of the Stoney Point people under the 19 name Aazhoodena and George Family Group. 20 A: Okay. 21 Q: Now, sir, you told us that the -- you 22 have a number of T-shirts as mementos of many different 23 OPP operations you've been involved in over the years; is 24 that right? 25 A: And police-related events, yes.


1 Q: I'm sorry, sir? 2 A: And police-related events. 3 Q: And other police-related 4 investigations that you weren't necessarily -- 5 A: No. I'm sorry, events. 6 Q: Events that you weren't necessarily 7 directly involved in. 8 A: Some, yes. 9 Q: Like you told us, 9/11, for example. 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: About how many such T-shirts do you 12 have; twenty (20), thirty (30), fifty (50)? 13 A: Probably in the area of twenty (20) 14 and then some. 15 Q: And most of them would be 16 commemorating OPP operations that you were involved in? 17 A: No, less than that; probably less 18 than half. 19 Q: So perhaps say ten (10) from OPP 20 operations? 21 A: It would be fewer than that. At this 22 point -- 23 Q: Okay. 24 A: -- I haven't gone through them all, 25 so I -- I don't want to --


1 Q: No, I -- 2 A: -- misspeak -- 3 Q: I'm not interested in the -- 4 A: -- misrepresent -- 5 Q: -- exact number, just a ball park 6 figure. 7 A: Be close to ten (10), maybe. 8 Q: It may be close to ten (10). So 9 eight (8), nine (9), ten (10), something like that? 10 A: Possibly. 11 Q: And did any of those other ones 12 involve operations that involved First Nations people? 13 A: Not that I recall, sir. 14 Q: And -- 15 A: I can't -- I can't place an event 16 that I was at that involved First Nations persons, 17 specifically. No, I can't recall that. 18 Q: And did any of those other ones 19 involve events at which an OPP officer had killed 20 someone? 21 A: No, sir. 22 Q: Now you told us, as far as you 23 recall, you didn't wear this T-shirt in public? You 24 recall your evidence, sir? 25 A: That's correct.


1 Q: But I -- I gather you would have worn 2 it sometimes in gatherings of fellow officers, for 3 example? 4 A: The only distinct memory I have of 5 wearing it was as an undershirt, and it was -- 6 occasionally I wear black T-shirts as undershirts, and 7 when I'm working. And that's probably the only time I -- 8 I wore it, and I only wore it a few times. 9 Q: You only -- 10 A: I didn't wear it often -- 11 Q: -- wore it a few time? 12 A: I didn't wear it often, as I recall. 13 When I did locate the shirt earlier -- or late last year, 14 early this year, I was a little surprised I still had it. 15 I -- I've lost track of the shirts that I did have that I 16 went through. 17 Some I didn't realize I had, that I still 18 had. Others I'd totally forgotten about. And I went 19 through the shirts and it was there. 20 Q: Well, now wouldn't you have worn it 21 at some gatherings of fellow officers who were 22 commemorating their involvement in OPP -- in the 23 Ipperwash operation at some point, November, December, 24 January -- 25 A: That --


1 Q: -- after the operation? 2 A: That didn't take place. There was a 3 couple of gatherings, but they weren't large in nature. 4 I'd be hard pressed to put dates on them and it's not a 5 T-shirt type of gathering. 6 Q: I see. You would have felt, I 7 gather, though, from the way you've described it, more 8 comfortable wearing it in front of a fellow officer than 9 you would have wearing it in public? 10 A: If I wore it. Again, it was 11 something that I had, it wasn't with the intent to parade 12 it around or -- or wear it. 13 It had meaning to myself, not -- not to 14 others. 15 Q: With your indulgence, may I see the 16 actual T-shirt that was filed as an exhibit, please? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: Thank you. You told us that some of 21 the commemorative T-shirts that you have were never worn. 22 They still even have price tags on them. Is that 23 correct? 24 A: That's correct. 25 Q: But this has evidently been washed at


1 least several times; is that fair to say? 2 A: Fair to say. 3 Q: And you wouldn't wash it if you 4 hadn't worn it, presumably? 5 A: Correct. 6 Q: So we can infer that you wore -- you 7 wore it at least on several different occasions? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And taking your mind back, would that 10 not have included at least some occasions where you 11 interacted with fellow police officers? 12 A: I -- I don't recall ever wearing it 13 in that situation, sir. Again, they wouldn't be T-shirt 14 events. And in terms of how that looks today, it is 15 almost eleven (11) years old and I have shirts that are 16 less aged than that, that I have never worn and look in 17 much worse condition. 18 So I -- I can't explain what you're 19 suggesting is the number of times it's been worn and 20 washed. 21 Q: Well perhaps not a formal event, but 22 perhaps you had one (1) or two (2) fellow officers over 23 for dinner sometime and wore shirts like this, no? 24 A: No, sir. 25 Q: No. Okay, thank you.


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: Now, did you ever see another officer 4 wearing a shirt like that? 5 A: Not that I recall. 6 Q: Did you ever see an officer wearing 7 the other T-shirt that we know of, that was made at this 8 time, with the eagle feather? 9 A: Like I said earlier, I wasn't aware 10 there were more than that type. 11 Q: I see. And you told us it was 12 relatively recently you became aware that there was a 13 second T-shirt? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: And when was that, sir? 16 A: Thursday morning. 17 Q: Not until Thursday morning did you 18 realize that your T-shirt was different from the T-shirt 19 that had been discussed previously at the Inquiry? 20 A: That's correct. 21 Q: I see. Thursday morning being the 22 Thursday -- 23 A: Last week. 24 Q: -- at which -- at which the T-shirt 25 was presented to the Inquiry.


1 A: Prior to nine o'clock I became 2 aware -- 3 Q: Yes. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Now, you told us you found this T- 6 shirt late last year, sometime around Christmas or New 7 Years, in a stack of similar shirts, right? 8 A: Correct. 9 Q: And then you told us that when you 10 realized you had it, you knew it was an issue and you 11 maintained it in your possession in case it was asked 12 for, for purposes of the Inquiry? 13 A: No, I maintained it because it had a 14 personal value to me; it meant something to me. And I 15 maintained it, and I also recognized that it potentially 16 had an import here. 17 Q: Yes. 18 A: At the time I had not been asked 19 specifically -- 20 Q: Yes. 21 A: -- if I had the shirt, I subsequently 22 was. 23 Q: And up to that time, nobody had asked 24 you specifically if you had any T-shirt relating to 25 Ipperwash, right?


1 A: That's correct. 2 Q: And there was never, as far as you 3 were aware of, any order that officers possessing any T- 4 shirts from Ipperwash should turn them into their 5 commanding officers, or anything like that? 6 A: I recall no such order. 7 Q: Or anything at all in that direction, 8 right? 9 A: That's correct. 10 Q: Now with respect to the logo on it, 11 you told us about -- that the TRU symbol is on top, and 12 clearly ERT at the bottom. And then you acknowledged to 13 Mr. Falconer that an obvious interpretation of the arrow 14 is that it represents First Nations people. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're not 16 going to -- you're not going to repeat the same areas 17 that Mr. Falconer went over in great detail? 18 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Not at all, I'm -- 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 20 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- just setting the 21 stage for what I want to do, which is to begin right now. 22 23 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 24 Q: So given those three (3) obvious 25 interpretations, TRU, ERT, First Nations, would you agree


1 that the obvious interpretation of the logo, as a whole, 2 is something to the effect of, that between them, in the 3 course of Project Maple, TRU and ERT crushed the First 4 Nations people, right? 5 That's what it says: TRU, anvil, arrow, 6 crush, right? 7 A: That's your interpretation, it's not 8 mine, sir. 9 Q: Would you agree that's an obvious 10 interpretation? 11 A: No. 12 Q: I see. What about between them they 13 broke the First Nations people? 14 A: That would be more the obvious, the 15 fact that the -- 16 Q: That would be more -- 17 A: -- arrow is broken -- 18 Q: -- the obvious, okay. 19 A: Yes, sir. 20 Q: So the obvious interpretation is 21 that, between TRU and ERT, they broke the First Nations 22 people. That's what you would say is the obvious 23 interpretation? 24 A: That's an obvious, literal 25 translation, based on what it depicts. It's not mine,


1 again, but it -- it does, to someone else I can see that. 2 Q: No, I appreciate you've told us your 3 position. And if someone knew that this operation has 4 resulted in the death of a First Nation people and they 5 looked at that symbol an obvious interpretation would be 6 a commemoration of the killing of a First Nations person, 7 right, breaking the arrow? 8 A: I wouldn't agree, sir. 9 Q: You don't agree. Okay. 10 I shall move on, Mr. Commissioner. 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 12 Mr. Rosenthal. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 15 Q: Now, if you could please turn to Tab 16 13 of -- 17 A: I have it. 18 Q: -- your document brief there, sir, -- 19 A: I have it. 20 Q: -- which is the transcript of the 21 tape from 10:27 p.m. to 11:10 p.m. on September 6th, 22 1995, that is entered as Exhibit P-438. 23 I want to ask you about two (2) things at 24 the beginning of the transcript. Several lines into the 25 transcript, about five (5) or six (6), attributed to you


1 is the statement, "I just got an idea". 2 Do you see that, sir? 3 A: I see that. 4 Q: What was that idea? 5 A: I have no clue, sir. 6 Q: Apparently it's after Officer Lacroix 7 had instructed the CMU to halt. And when you take your 8 mind back you can't assist us at all as to what idea you 9 would have had? 10 A: No, sir, I can't. 11 Q: And the next recording in the 12 transcript is Officer Lacroix stating: 13 "Okay, good news. They've got rocks 14 and sticks piled up and we all know we 15 can beat that. Rocks and sticks; 16 that's in our bailiwick." 17 You would have heard that transmission at 18 the time, sir? 19 A: Probably. 20 Q: And that would have given you some 21 comfort in the sense that it was an assurance that they 22 don't have firearms, they have just rocks and sticks and 23 that's what the Crowd Management Unit is used to dealing 24 with, right? 25 A: It was consistent with our mandate


1 and -- and our -- our training and for what we were told 2 to do that night it -- it left -- I don't recall the 3 statement -- hearing it first-hand but it -- it reads to 4 me now that it's normal. 5 Q: Yes. 6 A: And -- 7 Q: As opposed to the abnormal and very 8 dangerous situation of firearms which was a different 9 contention? 10 A: Right, and that -- and that came up 11 soon thereafter? 12 Q: Yes. Later on there was a possible 13 sighting of a firearm and so on but -- 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: -- but it would -- in that sense it 16 would have given you relative comfort compared to the 17 possibility of firearms? 18 A: I can't comment what that statement 19 made me feel at the time because I don't recall hearing 20 it so I -- 21 Q: That's fine. 22 A: -- can't give you my mindset at the 23 time. 24 Q: Now, you told us that you understood 25 that your mission was to -- you or the Crowd Management


1 Unit mission that night was to get people out of the 2 sandy parking lot and into the Park, right? 3 A: Correct. 4 Q: Now, did you at the time understand 5 or do you understand now any rational reason for 6 preferring the First Nations people to be on the Park 7 side of the fence versus the sandy parking lot side of 8 the fence? 9 A: I'm -- the first part of the 10 question, sir? 11 Q: You've told us that your mission was 12 to get them on one (1) side of that fence, the Ipperwash 13 Park side of the fence, right? 14 A: Yes. Our mission was to secure that 15 area, but yes. 16 Q: And you understood that that was to 17 be accomplished by ensuring that they were on the Park 18 side of the fence as opposed to the parking lot side of 19 the fence; is that correct? 20 A: Preferably, yes. 21 Q: Preferably? 22 A: Well, the area could be secured and 23 there still could be persons in the sandy parking lot 24 but... 25 Q: I see. Well, -- well, what did you


1 mean by, "secured" then, sir? 2 A: Making sure that there was no 3 activity there that -- that could possibly breach the 4 peace? 5 Q: Yes? 6 A: It could be activity that would be of 7 great angst for the people that lived within a stone's 8 throw of that area. 9 Q: A stone's throw is -- 10 A: Well -- 11 Q: -- an interesting choice of words. 12 A: It is. 13 Q: Yes. Now, there was no indication 14 was there that you were aware of, before you got to that 15 area that there was any problem in the area currently 16 going on, right? 17 A: Well yes, yes there was, sir. There 18 was the indications of the damage to the motor vehicle on 19 the roadway which -- 20 Q: Yes. You understood that took place 21 hours before, right? 22 A: No. I understood that to have taken 23 place during the time that we were in the process of 24 debriefing and having the in -- the ASP batons issued to 25 us.


1 Q: At about what time in the evening are 2 you talking, sir? Just ball park time. 3 A: Ballpark? That would be in the 7:00 4 to 7:30 range. 5 Q: Yeah, so that's hours before you 6 marched down the road is it not? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Sir, that's what I suggested -- 9 A: Okay. I'm sorry you were -- you lost 10 me where -- what piece you were saying, maybe. 11 Q: So my question was: Was there any 12 danger to security in that parking lot taking place and 13 you indicated -- you understood a car had been damaged 14 and I suggested to you that was several hours before, and 15 you agreed that was several hours before you were marking 16 down the road, right? 17 A: Before we marched, yes, sir. 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: There was also the issue of bonfires 20 which I don't recall as we were marching down the road, 21 if we had confirmed 100 percent yet whether that bonfire 22 was either in the public access area or the Park. 23 Q: Yes. You don't send forty (40) 24 officers marching down a road to determine which side of 25 the fence a bonfire's on do you?


1 A: No. But that -- that activity of 2 maintaining a large bonfire suggests to me that to -- to 3 do that, you'd have people out there and with people 4 would lead to the potential for issues of safety and what 5 not for the people that lived immediately adjacent to the 6 sandy parking lot. So it's a public safety issue. 7 Q: Well we have some evidence, sir, that 8 earlier on -- on in the evening and I don't know if you 9 were aware of this at the time, that John Carson had 10 said, in talking to some of the officers, I don't believe 11 you were present, that if -- if they're not do -- if 12 they're just having a campfire, let's just leave them 13 alone. Or words to that affect, okay. 14 Did you -- did you ever hear of that by 15 the way? 16 A: No, I didn't, sir. 17 Q: Not until I mentioned it to you right 18 now? 19 A: I've heard of it, but not at the time 20 I didn't. 21 Q: That evening you hadn't heard of it? 22 A: No. 23 Q: It's only with -- all the subsequent 24 discussion at this Inquiry and so on that you were aware 25 of that?


1 A: Yes. That's correct. 2 Q: But you were not aware of any problem 3 in that parking lot after the attack on the car several 4 hours earlier, right? 5 A: Again, aside from the bonfire, no. 6 Q: Aside from the bonfire which you 7 thought was in the parking lot, but in fact was in the 8 Park, right? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: And when you say your mission was to 11 secure the area, would that have been consistent with an 12 order, If they're just having a campfire, leave them 13 alone. 14 A: Could have been. 15 Q: Could have been. So if the 16 observations were at the time you were marching, that 17 they were just having a campfire or doing some other 18 innocuous activity, your understanding of your 19 instructions would have been leave them alone; is that 20 correct? 21 A: It depends at what point that it had 22 become known to us; whether it was first hand, whether it 23 was through information from the Sierra teams. A lot 24 would be dictated upon what we were presented with when 25 we arrived.


1 Or if we had of been called off prior to 2 that, that wouldn't be my decision. 3 Q: But if you had established what I 4 just said, you -- your understanding was you would have 5 left them alone, right? 6 A: No, I wouldn't say that. 7 Q: I see. So your understanding was 8 even if they were just having a campfire in the parking 9 lot, totally relaxed, toasting marshmallows, you were to 10 get them out of the parking lot; is that your 11 understanding? 12 A: No. I thought you were referring to 13 whether or not we would continue down the roadway. If 14 they -- if it would have been established that the fire 15 was just in the sandy parking lot, my sense is we would 16 have continued down there just to see first hand what was 17 going on, what was happening, potential existed for 18 dialogue depending on what we were met with. 19 Q: Now, sir, you told Mr. Falconer 20 earlier today that you weren't equipped for dialogue with 21 the way you were dressed, right? 22 A: Considering what we were met with, 23 dialogue wasn't appropriate. 24 25 (BRIEF PAUSE0


1 A: If we weren't pelted with rocks and 2 stones, then there may have been an opportunity for some 3 dialogue depending on the situation. But the reality was 4 that didn't happen, so I -- I can't speculate beyond 5 that. 6 Q: As far as you know, were any of the 7 officers in the Crowd Management Unit prepared to enter 8 into dialogue with the person in the Park or the parking 9 lot? 10 A: Staff Sergeant Lacroix and I 11 certainly could have but again that's speculation 12 depending on what we were met up with. 13 Q: But as part of the briefing was there 14 a discussion of possible dialogue with those persons? 15 A: Specifically, no. 16 Q: Or generally? 17 A: No. 18 Q: No -- 19 A: Not that I recall. 20 Q: -- there was no consideration of 21 possible dialogue was there? 22 A: Not that I recall but -- 23 Q: No. 24 A: -- hopefully it's clear that had we 25 gotten down to that area and there was an opportunity to


1 do so that it would have been done. Everything we did 2 was predicated on what we were met with. 3 And had we met with persons simply sitting 4 around the campfire roasting marshmallows I'm sure there 5 would have been dialogue, but that's not what happened. 6 Q: Well, now, if persons had been 7 sitting around a campfire roasting marshmallows and they 8 heard and so on, forty (40) officers marching down the 9 road they probably wouldn't keep toasting their 10 marshmallows, don't you think? 11 A: Why not if they're not doing anything 12 wrong? 13 Q: I see. Well, I'll tell you why not, 14 sir. We've had evidence from several sources that they've 15 been told for a couple of days prior that they were 16 regarded as trespassers in the Park and when they saw a 17 bunch of officers marching down the road they thought the 18 mission of those officers was to evict them from the 19 Park. 20 It sounds reasonable doesn't it? 21 A: That's your assertion. 22 Q: And you didn't have any understanding 23 of that at the time? 24 A: Of which, sir? 25 Q: Of the possibility that persons in


1 the Park might think, when forty (40) officers are 2 marching down against them that they're trying to evict 3 them from the Park? 4 A: That's possible. However, with us 5 being met prior to getting to that area, 100 yards out 6 plus, as well as being assaulted with rocks and stones I 7 don't know what their mindset would be. It didn't -- it 8 wasn't peaceful. 9 Q: But they had been told that they were 10 regarded as trespassers. 11 A: That may well be true, yes. 12 Q: Yes, that certainly is true. We have 13 evidence from many, many sources about that. 14 Now, sir, you seem to press reliance on 15 where you are -- were on the road. Do you think it's not 16 reasonable for a person from Stoney Point who sees you 17 300 metres down the road marching in that direction to 18 think that you might be marching on the Park? 19 Is that what you're implying? 20 A: It could be reasonable to think we 21 were, yes. 22 Q: That would be reasonable. And you 23 knew that the roads were closed at that point, right, to 24 traffic? 25 A: Yes.


1 Q: So you knew there wasn't any danger 2 that those people would hurt anyone else because there 3 weren't people allowed to drive down that road, right? 4 A: That's not correct, sir, there were 5 people living on that roadway -- 6 Q: I see, yes. 7 A: -- right next to the Park. 8 Q: There were several cottages on the 9 road, right? 10 A: That's correct. 11 Q: And did you learn whether people were 12 in those cottages or not? 13 A: I understood there were. 14 Q: You understood there were. Well, we 15 have evidence that Incident Commander Carson had the 16 understanding that at the nearest cottage at least, to 17 the sandy parking lot there was no on home. 18 You weren't aware of that? 19 A: Okay. No. 20 Q: Was there any instruction that you 21 were aware of to send any officers to the cottages to see 22 if people were home, to protect any people that might be 23 in the cottages? 24 A: I know we had officers on the beach 25 which would be to the north or to the water side of the


1 cottages there. And I -- I don't have direct knowledge 2 or direct sense that -- that had been done, no. 3 Q: Now, sir, if the road was closed to 4 traffic and there were officers at checkpoints, and if 5 the concern was about the several cottages near there, 6 wouldn't a more rational way of dealing with that concern 7 than marching forty (40) officers down the road, be to 8 send a few officers to the cottages and see what's 9 happening? 10 Wouldn't that have been the rational way 11 to deal with it at least in retrospect, sir? 12 A: Well, sir, I wasn't privy to all the 13 facts so I really can't comment on -- on the tactics that 14 were done that -- that night or the -- or the request of 15 what we were asked to do with the task. 16 Q: No, but from what you observed, sir, 17 you know and from everything you know since, you know 18 that what provoked stone throwing and so on was you 19 marching down the road at those people, right? 20 You conclude that don't you sir? 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Just a 22 minute. Just one (1) second. 23 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 25 Jones...?


1 MS. KAREN JONES: -- my concern about 2 that question is that preface -- it's prefaced on an 3 assumption. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You know. 5 MS. KAREN JONES: You know. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes? 7 MS. KAREN JONES: And that is -- that may 8 well be Mr. Rosenthal's assumption, but he certainly say 9 it's this Witness' assumption or anyone else's in 10 particulars, assumption. 11 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I didn't mean to 12 say it was his. I meant I was -- that was ended with a 13 question mark. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: No. 15 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Do you not agree, 16 is what I meant to be saying -- 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's a 18 better way to put it. 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: -- of course. 20 21 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: 22 Q: Do you not agree, in retrospect, and 23 putting together your eye witness testimony, your eye 24 witness at the time, taking your mind back, isn't it 25 clear to you that what provoked this whole business, was


1 you and your fellow officers marching down the road at 2 the Stoney Point people? 3 A: I don't agree, sir. 4 Q: I see. What, in your view, provoked 5 it? 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 A: Well, in my view, even before we had 10 actually left the sand -- or the -- the TOC site, radio 11 reports clearly indicated to me that the occupiers were - 12 - were getting ready to do battle. 13 Q: I see. And what report was that? 14 These -- these -- the damage to the car...? 15 A: The projectiles being dropped off, 16 reports of women and children being taken away, people 17 attempting to access that area with -- with weapons, 18 meaning clubs, bats, sticks, golf clubs, that type of 19 thing. 20 This is all in -- in my mind, my mindset 21 at the time was there was overt actions taken by the 22 occupiers to prepare for some type of confrontation. 23 Q: Defensive confrontation, obviously, 24 right? Piling up stones and so on in the Park was to 25 defend the Park, obviously, right?


1 A: That's what they may have thought. 2 Q: That's what you would have thought, 3 would you not? What else could you think -- 4 A: Well -- 5 Q: A pile of stones in the Park is not 6 going to be used a kilometre away, right? It's to defend 7 the Park, right? 8 A: As it turned out, we were a 100 plus 9 metres away when -- when we started being hit, so I -- 10 I'm not sure how that would defend the Park. 11 Q: It was an attempt to defend the Park, 12 right? It couldn't be an attempt to offensively attack 13 people a kilometre away, to pile stones in the Park, 14 right? 15 A: Okay. If they're all -- if 16 everything's piled at the Park, yes. 17 Q: Yes. Sir, excuse me a second. I 18 should like to ask your reaction to an extract from an 19 exhibit. If you could give one to the Commissioner, one 20 to the witness, please. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: This is an excerpt of a couple of 25 pages from a document that is now Exhibit P-1462 to these


1 proceedings. It's the in-chief evidence of Officer 2 Lacroix at the trial of Warren George. 3 I should just like to ask you your 4 response to a couple of statements attributed to Officer 5 Lacroix in this transcript. 6 On the first page of this excerpt, page 91 7 at about line 11: 8 "A: So we carried on. I had 9 originally been briefed to stop about 10 200 yards out to let our presence be 11 known so that any occupiers would know 12 that we were there and that we were in 13 hard TAC equipment." 14 And then continuing to about line 21: 15 "So I was briefed to stop at about 200 16 yards out and seek permission to carry 17 on from that time." 18 Now, my question to you, sir, was: As the 19 second in command, was it your understanding that the 20 crowd management unit was briefed to stop at about 200 21 yards out and seek permission to carry on from that time? 22 A: I don't recall it and I haven't noted 23 it, so I would say no. 24 Q: You don't recall that and you don't 25 have a note of it, so that was not your understanding?


1 A: I have no recollection of that, and 2 again, it's not in my notes, so -- 3 Q: I see. 4 A: -- if it happened, then it's 5 something I omitted to record, but I don't recall it. 6 7 (BRIEF PAUSE) 8 9 Q: Now, on the second page of this 10 excerpt, at page 92, it states, beginning at about line 11 11 -- well, I should begin a little earlier: 12 "We are at 200 yards. They're very 13 aware of our presence. They've seen 14 us. Their sentry's out with lights. 15 Got permission to proceed." 16 Was it your recollection that you got 17 permission to proceed, from some point at which you were 18 stopped? 19 A: No, it's not my recollection. 20 Q: Thank you. Now you told us, sir -- 21 sorry, I'm done with that excerpt, sir. You can keep it 22 and read it on your town, if you wish. 23 Now you told us that when you arrived at 24 the fence that was between the sandy parking lot and the 25 Park, you felt that your mission was accomplished because


1 the First Nations people were on the other side of the 2 fence. 3 Do you recall that evidence, sir? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: And then you were planning to leave 6 at that point? 7 A: I was prepared to leave, yes. 8 Q: Prepared to leave. So it's your 9 understanding that if nothing else had happened at that 10 point, if you just stood at the fence for a couple of 11 minutes and nothing happened, the CMU would have turned 12 around and marched back down the road to the TOC? 13 A: We -- we would have received some -- 14 some direction to do either that or stay in the area. 15 Some of the transcript indicates we were asked to find 16 some sort of cover, if it was available. 17 I -- I don't -- sorry, I wasn't part of 18 the planning process that dictated what the options would 19 be once we got down there, what -- what would have been 20 plan 'B' or 'C' or 'D'. 21 Q: That wasn't part of the planning. 22 A: I'm sorry? 23 Q: You -- I'm just repeating what you 24 said, I think. That was not part of the planning to deal 25 with that.


1 A: It wasn't part of the plan that I was 2 aware of. 3 Q: That you were aware of. 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Now as Second in Command, by the way, 6 it's important for you to be aware of everything about 7 the plan that the Commander of the CMU was aware of; is 8 that not true? 9 A: Staff Lacroix? 10 Q: Yes. 11 A: It would be useful. 12 Q: Yes. You're suppose to both know as 13 much as possible, so that you can truly assist him in the 14 best possible way, right? 15 A: That's very true. The reality was I 16 wasn't part of the meeting that he had with Command Staff 17 that night. 18 Q: Yes. Yes, you -- you weren't part of 19 any briefing that he received from either Inspector 20 Carson or Staff Sergeant, I believe he was, Skinner? 21 A: Correct. 22 Q: So your understanding was that your 23 mission was to secure the area. And that did not 24 necessarily require that they be out of the sandy parking 25 lot, as long as nothing bad was happening in the sandy


1 parking lot, right? 2 A: It would -- it would be determined by 3 what we found when we got there. 4 Q: Yes. But securing the area, in your 5 view, didn't require them to be on one side or the other 6 of that fence, necessarily, as long as it was a calm 7 situation. 8 A: I'd agree with that. 9 Q: So -- but then when you were standing 10 at the fence, you felt your mission was accomplished; in 11 other words, the area was secured, in your view. Is that 12 fair? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: But then you weren't sure what would 15 -- what would happen then if it remained in that 16 situation. 17 You weren't sure whether there was any 18 plan for you to withdraw or you were suppose to stay 19 there all night to make sure the area stayed secure or 20 what; is that what you're telling us? 21 A: Correct. I didn't know what was 22 coming next, once we had accomplished what we were sent 23 there to do. 24 Q: Now you told us that -- excuse me, 25 Mr. Commissioner. At one point on May 11 and answering


1 questions for Ms. Vella, you were discussing a punchout, 2 and I'm just sensing a little aspect of that at page 3 195. 4 You told us that potentially someone in 5 that scenario could quite conceivably have been a leader, 6 which would be an objective at that stage, to identify 7 and apprehend leaders. 8 So I guess one of the techniques that you 9 taught as part of the Crowd Management Unit training, is 10 that if possible you should apprehend the leaders. 11 That would tend to dispel a crown more 12 quickly than apprehending other people; is that fair? 13 A: That's fair. 14 Q: And that's what you were referring to 15 there? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And at that time, as you marched down 18 the road, did you have any knowledge as to who might have 19 been the leaders of the people in the Park? 20 A: No. 21 Q: If there had been intelligence that 22 would have revealed that, that might have been of 23 assistance for the purpose that you indicated in the 24 excerpt I quoted, right? 25 A: Potentially, but it wouldn't have


1 been of too much value because names really wouldn't have 2 meant much of anything to the officers that we were -- 3 that I was there with. We weren't -- 4 Q: Yes? 5 A: -- familiar with the area. 6 Q: Just names would not be of much 7 assistance if the officers didn't know what the person 8 looked like, right? 9 A: Correct. 10 Q: But for example if there had been 11 pictures of leaders that might have been part of the 12 briefing and might have been of some assistance, right? 13 A: I'd agree. 14 Q: Or any other description? If you had 15 been told one (1) of their leaders is a very tall guy 16 with a moustache, that might have helped you in 17 apprehending leaders as a way of quelling this 18 disturbance from your perspective, right? 19 A: Well, that in itself, no, but... 20 Q: But you want to tell -- as much 21 intelligence of that type as you could have in dealing 22 with a situation like this; is that a fair -- 23 A: If it unfolded to the -- to the point 24 that it was required or wise to do so, yes. 25 Q: And somebody then who you could


1 identify as a leader would be somebody you'd be more 2 likely to apprehend quickly in order to quell such a 3 disturbance with less effort than just arresting 4 everyone? 5 A: Certainly an option, sir. If -- if 6 the -- if the situation had of escalated to the point 7 that such action was warranted and we could that would be 8 an objective, certainly. 9 Q: Because we've had some evidence at 10 this Inquiry, sir, from some of the Stoney Point people 11 who were there that one (1) of the reasons they didn't 12 identify any leaders to the OPP officers is that they 13 were afraid that they might be targeted for arrest or for 14 some other kind of harassment. 15 What you're saying -- you can understand 16 those concerns, is that fair? 17 A: If that's accurate, that's fair. 18 Q: Now, if you could please look at Tab 19 32? 20 21 (BRIEF PAUSE) 22 23 Q: At Tab 32 we have Inquiry Document 24 Number 1004489. And the second page in there is a typed 25 statement that is titled, Information of George


1 Hebblethwaite. 2 Do you see -- do you have that, sir? 3 A: I do, sir. 4 Q: I believe you were asked about this 5 during your examination by Ms. Vella the other day -- 6 A: I was. 7 Q: -- briefly, and what you told her was 8 that you weren't familiar with this typed version of this 9 but that you had made some written statement at about 10 this time and you weren't familiar with this typed 11 version. 12 Do you remember something to that effect, 13 sir? 14 A: Yes, I do. 15 Q: Now, sir, have you reviewed this 16 typed version though? 17 A: I'm sorry? 18 Q: Have -- have you had occasion to 19 review this typed version more recently? 20 A: It's been a few weeks since I've read 21 it front to back. 22 Q: I see, yes. Is this typed version as 23 far as you recollect an accurate rendition of the 24 information that you would have provided to Mr. Piers 25 when he was doing his investigation?


1 A: Yes. 2 Q: Thank you. Before I forget, Mr. 3 Commissioner, given that answer I should like this to be 4 made the next exhibit if I may? 5 THE REGISTRAR: P-1499. 6 7 --- EXHIBIT NO. P-1499: Document Number 1004489. 8 Affidavit of Ron Piers, 9 September 02, 1998; and 10 information on George 11 Hebblethwaite, October 05, 12 1997; October 05, 1997. 13 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Hmm hmm. 15 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: That should include 16 both documents at this tab, Inquiry Document Number 17 1004489. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Does that 19 include the two (2) pages that are part of the Affidavit? 20 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And the two 22 (2) pages of the statement? 23 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Yes, thank you. 24 25 CONTINUED BY MR. PETER ROSENTHAL:


1 Q: Now, I'm interested in the second 2 page of your statement, sir, so it's the last page in 3 that tab. 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 Q: Now, partially we can summarize this 8 can we, that you had a number of interactions with Norm 9 Peel, the lawyer representing Ken Deane with the goal of 10 assisting the defence in that trial; is that fair? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: And... 13 14 (BRIEF PAUSE) 15 16 Q: Then you indicated that you were in 17 Court on the judgment day, April 28th; that's in the 18 second paragraph on that page. 19 Now, during the times that you met with 20 Mr. Peel, did you regard that as part of your duties as 21 an OPP officer or was that in your own time, sir? 22 A: That was part of my duty, sir. 23 Q: Part of your duties? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: I see. So who assigned you to that


1 duty of meeting with Mr. Peel? 2 A: I don't recall. 3 Q: You don't recall. It would have been 4 your supervisor? 5 A: Not necessarily. The information 6 could have come to me through a variety of ways. 7 Q: I'm sorry, sir? 8 A: It could have come to me through a 9 variety of ways. I don't recall specifically how I was 10 contacted or who made the request. 11 It needn't necessarily go through my 12 Detachment Commander. 13 Q: It need not necessarily go through 14 the Detachment Commander? 15 A: That's correct. But I would 16 certainly have advised him of -- of what I was doing, 17 especially since I would be leaving my Detachment area of 18 jurisdiction. 19 Q: Yes. And this would be in the course 20 of your normal paid duty as an OPP officer? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And you -- you describe meeting with 23 several other officers some times in the course of this. 24 Was it your understanding that, as far as you understood, 25 that the officers who were working on Ken Deane's


1 defence, were doing so as part of their paid duties as 2 you were? 3 A: You'll have to direct me to... 4 Q: Well, for example, in the third 5 paragraph -- 6 A: On page 2? 7 Q: On page 2, yes. It reads: 8 "Following the judgment, Clarke drove 9 me to Peel's residence where most of 10 the participants in the trial were 11 meeting." 12 Well, let me ask you before I -- I will 13 continue that, sir, but the attending to sit through the 14 judgment on April 28th, that was part of your duties as 15 well? 16 A: It wasn't mandatory that I be there, 17 but I chose to be there. 18 Q: It wasn't mandatory, as opposed to 19 the earlier attendances were mandatory? You were 20 instructed to be there and as a good officer, you 21 followed your orders? 22 A: I wouldn't say it was an order, sir. 23 I was asked to -- to participate; I did. 24 Q: Well, you -- you distinguished this 25 day, judgment day, from the previous attendance by saying


1 that judgment day attending was not mandatory, right? 2 A: Well, I wasn't asked to be there, 3 that's correct. 4 Q: You weren't asked to be there? 5 A: No. I wasn't told to be there, I 6 wasn't asked to be there, I chose to be there. 7 Q: I see, but it was part of your paid 8 duties, though? 9 A: I was on-duty at the time. 10 Q: You were on-duty. 11 A: Yes, sir. 12 Q: So you would have had to inform at 13 least your Detachment Commander that you were attending? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: But the previous occasions you were 16 told to be there as opposed to the judgment day? 17 A: Again, it was just -- it was 18 necessary for me to be there. I -- I wouldn't want to 19 characterize it as being told or ordered. It was asked 20 of me to meet and be at certain places at certain times 21 to meet with certain people, and I did so. 22 Q: It would have been asked of you by a 23 superior officer; is that correct? 24 A: No, not necessarily. 25 Q: Not necessarily?


1 A: No. 2 Q: Well, if an officer who did not have 3 any command position in relation to you, asked you to do 4 that, you would have to check with your Detachment 5 Commander at least; is that correct? 6 A: I would inform him that I would be -- 7 I had been tasked to do something and it was never an 8 issue of me not participating. 9 Q: You'd have to inform that you'd been 10 tasked to do it; is that the word you used, sir? 11 A: That's the word I used, yeah. 12 Q: Well, could Ken Deane himself, for 13 example, have tasked you to assist him in his defence? 14 A: No. I was never in touch with 15 Officer Deane on this. 16 Q: I'm sorry? 17 A: Officer Deane was never involved in 18 any request for me to attend. 19 Q: I see. But you can't tell us which 20 officers were involved in tasking you to do that task? 21 A: No. 22 Q: There were several different such 23 officers in the course of the various times that you 24 attended? 25 A: I'm sorry?


1 Q: You attended on several occasions to 2 assist the defence, right? 3 A: Yes, I did. 4 Q: Would there have been one (1) officer 5 who would have been directing you throughout that period, 6 or there might have been several different officers who 7 told you on several different occasions to attend? 8 A: Jack Clarke was the individual I had 9 probably the majority, if not all, contact with during 10 this. 11 Q: I see. 12 A: And... 13 Q: And who was Jack Clarke at the time? 14 A: I believe he's retired. I -- I can't 15 be certain here he's an ex -- if he was an OPP officer or 16 a retired OPP officer from that area. 17 Q: I see. Well, certainly if he had 18 been retired, he could not task you to do an OPP 19 operation. 20 A: Well, I described it as a task, a 21 request, whatever term you'd like to use. It wasn't an 22 order, that's what I'm staying away from here. It was 23 not an order. 24 Q: Now the paragraph -- the third and 25 largest paragraph on the second page indicates that


1 following the judgment: 2 "Clark took me to Peel's residence 3 where most of the participants in the 4 trial were meeting. There was much 5 shock and belief. 6 At one point I became part of a 7 discussion in Peel's den and present 8 was Peel, Clarke, Wade Lacroix, John 9 Carson and I think Bob Goodall too." 10 Now do you recall that meeting, sir, 11 today? 12 A: Yes I have independent recollection 13 of it. 14 Q: And do you recall that those officers 15 were there? 16 A: I would agree with what I wrote back 17 in '97, yes. 18 Q: Yes. You would have been more 19 certain in '97 perhaps that you were accurate, than you 20 are some years later. 21 A: Yes, sir. 22 Q: Were there, to your recollection, 23 other officers in addition that you didn't think to name 24 in 1997 or do you believe that that was the entire group 25 at that point?


1 A: My sense is there were others but I - 2 - I can't recall who they were. 3 Q: You can't recall the names? 4 A: That's correct. 5 Q: Ken Deane was not present as far as 6 you recollect? 7 A: He wasn't there initially. I know he 8 came at some point. I don't recall him being there in 9 this meeting. 10 Q: He came at some point to -- to this 11 meeting or to another meeting? 12 A: No, to Peel's residence that -- that 13 afternoon. 14 Q: I see. So that same afternoon there 15 were several meetings at Peel's residence one might say 16 and he attended not this one but a subsequent. 17 A: No. It was a gathering -- 18 Q: A gathering. 19 A: -- at -- at Peel's residence which is 20 also his -- his office. 21 Q: I see. 22 A: And during that period of time in the 23 late afternoon, there was an occasion when the group of 24 officers that you've indicated here ended up in the den 25 area; what I describe as a den.


1 Q: Yes. 2 A: And there was direct discussion about 3 a few facets of -- of the decision that day. 4 Q: Yes. 5 A: But overall, after this particular 6 short period, I don't recall much of any -- anything that 7 you would like to classify as a meeting. It was simply a 8 gathering. It was in support of -- of those that were 9 present at the time and -- and others. 10 Q: And was it your understanding that 11 the other officers who were present, were present as 12 their paid duties as well? 13 A: I don't know that to be a fact, sir. 14 Q: Oh you -- you don't know, I see. So 15 maybe some were and some weren't as far as you -- 16 A: I -- I don't know. 17 Q: It's possible some were and some 18 weren't; you have no idea? 19 A: No idea. 20 Q: You did know did you not that Bob 21 Goodall had been in charge of the OPP investigation of 22 this incident? 23 A: I knew he -- he was -- I didn't 24 realize that if he had overall command of that 25 investigation or if -- if he was a small way down in the


1 ranking order of it but I knew he had a -- a senior job 2 to do with that investigation, yes. 3 Q: He -- he had a major job -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- to do with that investigation? 6 A: Yes. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Mr. Commissioner, 11 I'm at the end of my question. Thank you. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: You're 13 finished? 14 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: Thank you, Officer. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 16 Mr. Rosenthal. You were a lot shorter than you 17 anticipated. I hope that's an indication of things to 18 come. 19 MR. PETER ROSENTHAL: I -- I'm trying to 20 accumulate many points in case I need to cash them in 21 later, sir. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 23 very much. I think Mr. Ross is next. 24 Are we going to be in a position to have 25 our next witness? We may reach our next witness today.


1 Yes, Mr. Ross...? Nice to see you here 2 again. 3 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you, 4 Commissioner. Thank you, Commissioner. First I must 5 apologize -- first, Mr. Commissioner, I must apologize to 6 you. We had slated an hour and a half but with Mr. 7 Falconer and Mr. Rosenthal, unfortunately I won't be more 8 than twenty (20) minutes if that. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 10 I think we'll get along with that, Mr. Ross. Thank you 11 very much. 12 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Would we get along 13 better if I said no questions? 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: We'd get 15 along with that even better but I think you have a 16 responsibility to your clients to ask some questions so-- 17 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- we're 19 happy to have you here. 20 21 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 22 Q: Officer Hebblethwaite, greetings. My 23 name is Anthony Ross and I act for the residents at 24 Aazhoodena. 25 A: Good afternoon, sir.


1 Q: There are just a few areas that I 2 want to talk to you about and that most of what I would 3 have questioned you on has been canvassed and in spite of 4 the fact that I like to agonize the Commissioner it's not 5 appropriate at this time. 6 So first thing I'd like to talk to you 7 about is -- the first thing I must tell you, my questions 8 really relate to a large extent on the evidence that you 9 gave, your response to questions of Ms. Vella, and a few 10 that have been raised today. 11 Now, the first thing I wanted to talk to 12 you about was the police policy on the use of force. 13 Now, as I read the evidence, on page 35 particularly, it 14 indicates that the police are instructed that in the use 15 of the baton that they're not supposed to strike the 16 head, the neck, and the groin area. 17 That was your evidence and am I correct 18 with that? 19 A: That's correct. 20 Q: Yes, sir. So that when and even in 21 confusing circumstances I take it that you'd agree with 22 me that the police are required to really use their heads 23 and sort of try to conform with the rules rather than 24 just beating at random? 25 A: I'd agree with that, yes.


1 Q: So that when one inspects the medical 2 reports of Cecil Bernard George and find that he was 3 struck to the head is it reasonable to conclude that -- 4 that somebody other than the police would have struck him 5 in the head? 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, Ms. 7 Jones? 8 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 9 believe that the evidence of a doctor was that there was 10 both the cut to Mr. Cecil Bernard's lip and the small 11 gash at the back of his head were consistent with blunt 12 force trauma. I don't think that the doctor had any 13 idea, indeed didn't say anything about how it was caused. 14 So to put to him it was caused by someone 15 hitting I'm not sure is accurate. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: It's some 17 time ago, I don't exactly what it was. Do you, Mr. Ross? 18 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Mr. Commissioner, I 19 think there was evidence that he got blows on the head. 20 This Witness is saying that their training say that they 21 must not in the head -- hit in the head. 22 So I'm asking him, consistent with the 23 training that it's reasonable to conclude that it's other 24 than the police would have struck him in the head. He 25 can say "yes," sir, or "no."


1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes? 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: But if, in fact, Mr. George was 7 struck in the head I take it that it will be your 8 evidence that it would not be the police who struck him 9 there? 10 A: It may well have been the objects 11 that were being thrown at us also struck him. 12 Q: Yes, but as far as you were concerned 13 your trained officers would not have hit him in the head, 14 correct? 15 A: Intentionally, that's correct. 16 Q: I see. Intentionally. So if he got 17 hit in the head by the police it would be by accident? 18 A: I'm -- I would be confident in that, 19 yes. 20 Q: Yeah. I see. Now, as far as the 21 Crowd Management Unit is concerned you've got some 22 categories of crowds; number 1 they are either peaceful 23 or -- rowdy -- 24 A: Orderly or disorderly, yes. 25 Q: Orderly or disorderly, et cetera.


1 Now, what about a political uprising; where would that 2 fit in your categories? Would it be orderly or 3 disorderly? 4 A: It could well be orderly but it -- it 5 could certainly turn into a disorderly crowd depending on 6 how things evolve, what happens during the course of -- 7 of the gathering. Certainly political gatherings or 8 demonstrations are absolutely an inherent right of all 9 citizens to lawfully gather and demonstrate. 10 Q: Yes, but -- 11 A: But it -- it turns into a police 12 matter if things start getting out of hand. 13 Q: Yeah. Now, would you agree that with 14 the -- with the benefit of hindsight, with the benefit of 15 what happened in September 1995, would you agree that you 16 need another category of crowd for the purpose of dealing 17 with First Nations who genuinely believe that they've got 18 a specific right that the rest of Canadians don't have? 19 A: I wouldn't agree that another 20 category is necessary. I think I indicated in my 21 evidence in-chief that it's difficult to write policy for 22 every eventuality. 23 Q: That is true. 24 A: But -- but the policies that we do 25 have certainly are a good umbrella for everything and


1 then you -- you apply common sense and -- and utilize 2 techniques and tactics that fit the situation, regardless 3 of -- of the cause that's being put forward by the people 4 you're dealing with or regardless of the venue. 5 Q: So, sir, if one were to suggest to 6 you that what you had back in September of 1995 was 7 people rising up in their own land against government 8 policies related to that land, would you -- would you 9 agree with that as a broad statement? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Because, sir, you knew that as far as 12 the Park was concerned, it was the position of the 13 occupiers that they had rights to the Park? 14 A: Yes, I was. 15 Q: That was your evidence, pages 71 and 16 81. 17 So you saw this really as a land dispute. 18 You only -- you personally understand that it was a land 19 dispute that was driving this process? 20 A: Yes. An ownership dispute, yes. 21 Q: Yes. And then if there was a land 22 dispute, then the people who were involved in this 23 process, would you agree that they would have been there 24 under some colour of right, if they genuinely believed 25 that they had rights to those lands?


1 A: Well, I think now I'm getting into an 2 area that would be difficult to -- to comment on. 3 Q: Well, please -- 4 A: I don't know the people's mindsets in 5 total. I don't know on what basis they're basing it on. 6 So in terms of saying it was a colour of right, I'd -- 7 I'd be hard pressed to do so. 8 Q: I see. But you've heard of colour of 9 right as a defence, haven't you? 10 A: I certainly have. 11 Q: Yes. And you recognize that colour 12 of right must -- I must put it another way. Are you 13 aware that the colour of right defence is raised when the 14 person doing the act has a genuine belief that he's got 15 the right to do what he's accused of being doing? 16 A: Yes, I'm aware of -- of terminology 17 like that, yes. 18 Q: Okay, fine. And, sir, in your direct 19 evidence, you also indicated that the job of the CMU, the 20 job of the OPP, was to demonstrate a police presence down 21 in the area of the Park? 22 A: At what point, sir? 23 Q: On the evening of the 6th of 24 September, 1995. 25 A: Well, our presence was going to be


1 for purposes of securing the public access area, yes. 2 Q: Okay. Securing the public access 3 area. Secure the public access area to what, sir? 4 A: From any activity that could be 5 deemed to be breaching the peace or about to be breaching 6 the peace to potential threats to the safety and the 7 property of the people that lived adjacent to that 8 parking lot and points to the west. 9 Q: I see. So that if any First Nations 10 people were walking down in the area of the cottages, 11 would you have arrested them? 12 A: No. 13 Q: No. But if they're in the parking 14 lot, on the east side of the cottages, it creates a 15 different problem? 16 A: It would have depended on what you 17 were met with as to what action we would have taken. 18 Q: Sir, I am now forced to just -- just 19 read a section of your own evidence. Perhaps you could 20 look at pages 143, 144 and 145 of the transcript. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: While they're working on it, I can 25 tell you I'm such a lousy reader that they'll have it up


1 and running before I'm ready. 2 At page 143, I'll read you a series of 3 questions and answers starting at 143. Ms. Vella said: 4 Q: All right. It is part of the 5 mandate of the CMU to be deployed as a 6 diversionary tactic for TRU?" 7 That was a question. Your response: 8 "It is not listed as a written mandate, 9 but it is certainly an option. 10 Q: Now, as you get set to exit the 11 MNR parking lot, what type of crowd 12 situation, referring back to your 13 manual, did you expect the CMU was 14 likely to encounter? 15 A: At the very least, an aggressive 16 crowd, disorderly, aggressive crowd, 17 yes." 18 I must stop there for a minute. Now, who 19 made the assessment and the determination that it was 20 going to be an aggressive crowd? 21 A: I did. 22 Q: You did. That bothers me because I 23 can't -- I'm going to hope somebody can find it, but Ms. 24 Vella asked you, specifically, earlier, whether or not 25 you had classified the crowd, and you had said, No.


1 I'll see if I can find that for you. But 2 I will continue. 3 4 (BRIEF PAUSE) 5 6 Q: So anyway, just to confirm, you were 7 the one who made that classification? 8 A: I made it today -- or sorry, 9 Thursday. At the time I -- I'm certain I never voiced 10 that term to categorize the crowd that we would be seeing 11 that night. 12 Q: So when -- when you told Ms. Vella 13 about: "The crowd being an aggressive 14 crowd, disorderly, aggressive crowd, 15 yes." 16 That was your view last week of what the 17 crowd would have been in 1995. 18 A: No that was words that I -- or a 19 description that I used last week to describe the crowd 20 that I encountered in '95, that I expected to encounter 21 in '95 on September 6th -- 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: -- based on what had transpired in 24 the afternoon, in the early evening and on the way down 25 there.


1 Q: I see. So is it fair to say, then, 2 that you had a conclusion, you had a mind set of what you 3 were going to meet, and you went down there prepared for 4 that mind -- for a situation compatible with that 5 mindset? 6 A: Yes. And my mind set was borne out 7 to be true. 8 Q: Well -- well, okay, we're going to 9 get to the extra parts of your answer. Now -- and I take 10 it that it was because of that mind set, that you went 11 down there in hard TAC. 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: Yeah. So as far as your 14 classification is concerned, number one, the evidence of 15 Carson, I walked in through the individuals who were down 16 at the -- the Park, and he didn't classify any of them as 17 dangerous, he went on to say it was unlikely that any one 18 of them would be shooting at the police. 19 Was this also your view, that nobody would 20 be shooting at the police? 21 A: It was a possibility but I -- I 22 discounted it. It just seemed so highly unlikely, based 23 on the fact that what we would be doing should not bring 24 the situation to that level. 25 Q: I see. I take it that -- from your


1 answer, that you did not expect anybody to use firearms 2 against the police? 3 A: No. It was a possibility, but a 4 very -- 5 Q: Sure. As a matter of fact, it's a 6 possibility right now, isn't it? 7 A: Yeah, absolutely, sir. 8 Q: Okay, fine. But it's very unlikely. 9 A: It was unlikely at the time, that's 10 correct, in my mind. 11 Q: And even with ir being unlikely, the 12 force that was taken down the road was forty-four (44) 13 police officers, as part of the CMU, together with the 14 TRU team. 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: I see. I will continue. Now Ms. 17 Vella asked you then and here, sorry. 18 "And was this expectation, that is the 19 crowd, the aggressive crowd, was this 20 expectation expressed to the rest of 21 the unit by either yourself or Staff 22 Sergeant Lacroix?" 23 Your answer: 24 "Not explicitly." 25 You went on to say:


1 "I mean the members had worked all day. 2 We were -- ["We," okay?] we had seen 3 different things among us. It was -- 4 it was plain, by virtue of the radio 5 reports and what was going on that day, 6 that there was an air -- or a tension, 7 sorry, in the air, that seemed to 8 develop late that day, that, I believe, 9 I know I did perceive it." 10 And then you go onto say: 11 "I can't speak for others." 12 But the problem I'm having with that is 13 part of it you're saying, We have seen this, We have. 14 And then you go on to say, I can't speak for others. 15 So tell me something, did you express to 16 the other members of your team that you anticipated an 17 aggressive crowd? 18 A: Specifically, no, but -- but in 19 preparation I'm sure that was implied. 20 Q: So it was by implication? 21 A: Yes, by virtue of how we were 22 attired. 23 Q: Yes. 24 A: And how we approached and the 25 preparation that I did with the unit --


1 Q: I see. 2 A: -- before leaving Forest Detachment. 3 Q: And also, by implication, you 4 expected the occupiers to know that if they stayed in the 5 Park there would be no problems? 6 A: It would be implied because we didn't 7 enter the Park, and we backed up. 8 Q: No, sir, I -- I find that you're not 9 answering my questions, you're giving me a response but 10 it's not answering my question. 11 I'm saying to you, you made it clear that 12 you formed the view that you were going to be meeting an 13 aggressive crowd, and you also told me that you did not 14 impart this to the other members of the CMU. 15 You went further to say that they would 16 understand, by implication. And I'm saying to you that 17 as far as the occupiers are concerned, nobody told them, 18 If you stay in the Park there will be no problem. 19 Do you agree with that statement? 20 A: I don't know if anyone did. 21 Q: Did you tell them, If you stay in the 22 Park there will be no problem? 23 A: No, I did not. 24 Q: Do you know whether or not Wade 25 Lacroix did this?


1 A: I'm sure that he didn't. 2 Q: You're sure that he didn't. Do you 3 know of anybody who indicated to the occupiers, If you 4 stay in the Park there will be no problem? 5 A: I don't know if anyone did. 6 Q: Okay. Fine. But they were to 7 understand this by the way you were dressed? How were 8 they to conclude that? 9 A: Well, when we first got down there we 10 don't go into the Park, we stop, we back up. 11 Q: I see. Okay. I will continue. You 12 said you can't speak for others. 13 Q: Right?" 14 You say: 15 "But it was -- it was obvious. I don't 16 know how to explain it any differently. 17 Q: All right. And did you have any 18 serious concerns about the capability 19 of this CMU to fulfill its mission of 20 clearing the sandy parking lot? 21 A: No, I didn't. 22 Q: Did the relative darkness that you 23 were present facing cause you any 24 concern? 25 A: Well, I didn't like it, but it


1 still didn't alter the fact that we had 2 a -- we had a task to complete." 3 So you were going to complete this task, 4 regardless of the lighting conditions at that time, 5 because it was your job; am I correct? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Yeah. Then: 8 "Q: All right." 9 And you answer -- and you say: 10 "It wasn't ideal." 11 Then it goes on: 12 "Q: And for the obvious reason that 13 it would have been more ideal if you 14 got a full vision for what's in front 15 of you? 16 A: Yes. That -- that's correct. 17 Q: Did you have any sense as to what 18 the under -- what the role of the -- or 19 the anticipated role of the K-9 20 officers and their dogs would be that 21 night? 22 A: They were part of the Crowd 23 Management Training Course Standard. 24 It would all depend on what we met with 25 there. So much we -- that were doing


1 was simply preparing for the worst, and 2 dealing with what we encountered in the 3 manner that it was dealt to us." 4 Is it fair to say that you went down 5 there, as part of a team leadership group, expecting the 6 worst, with plans to meet it head on? 7 A: That's fair. 8 Q: And then Ms. Vella says: 9 "All right." 10 And this is the one (1) sentence that I 11 really wanted to put to you, the rest was for context. 12 You said: 13 "Such that if persons were back in the 14 Park, the area was clear, which is what 15 we found when we first there -- went 16 there, that's fine." 17 Sir, I'm suggesting to you that when you 18 got there, the parking lot was clear, nobody was in the 19 parking lot? 20 A: Well, there were people out of the -- 21 of the Park -- 22 Q: No, sir -- 23 A: -- when we -- 24 Q: -- I don't -- look, I just want to 25 point out to you what you told Ms. Vella. You said:


1 "Such that if persons were back in the 2 Park, the area was clear -- the area's 3 clear, which is what we found when we 4 first went there. That's fine." 5 So I'm suggesting to you that the parking 6 lot was clear. 7 What do you say about that? 8 A: Well that's somewhat out of context. 9 There were clearly people outside of the Park as we were 10 advancing down the roadway. 11 When we finally found ourselves at the 12 fence, everyone that I -- I had no view of anyone outside 13 of the Park, and none of the occupiers, that I could see, 14 were outside of the Park by the time we got down to the 15 fence line and I realized we were there. 16 There were certainly people, occupiers, 17 outside of the Park prior to us getting down into the 18 sandy parking lot, by virtue of the vehicle or the all- 19 terrain type vehicle that drove down the road towards us, 20 and the rocks and -- and whatever it was that was being 21 thrown at us, and the spotlights that were being used in 22 our faces. 23 Q: So that when you told Ms. Vella that 24 it was clear, which is what you found when you first went 25 up there, that's not a correct statement?


1 A: Well when we finally hit the fence 2 line, by that point, everyone that had been outside would 3 have been back inside, from what I could tell. 4 Q: But I thought, in your cross- 5 examination response to Mr. Rosenthal, you indicated that 6 when you came down Matheson Drive, you went straight 7 across and the first thing you wound up is at the fence, 8 which means you had to cross the -- the parking lot? 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes. 10 THE WITNESS: Well, sir, there was -- 11 there was activity that we engaged 100/150 metres outside 12 of the Park, and there had to have been persons from -- 13 or occupiers quite a distance away from the Park into the 14 public access area, prior to us finally getting up to the 15 fence. 16 So when we did get to the fence, it would 17 be my view that everyone that had been outside of the 18 Park was now back in the Park. 19 But prior to us getting there, there was 20 people outside of the Park. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I don't want 22 to rush you, Mr. Ross, but this area was covered -- 23 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Well, I'm -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- in some 25 detail by Mr. Falconer.


1 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: That is true and the - 2 - I'm just trying to fill a gap, sir. I was aware of 3 that, thank you, Commissioner. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 6 Q: There's one other thing I'd just like 7 you to -- to clear up for me. You indicated, and it's 8 around page 80, that the -- that one of the cars of the 9 occupiers had long guns. 10 Now you didn't see any guns yourself, did 11 you? 12 A: I'm sorry? 13 Q: There was reference to long guns in 14 page 80. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: Page 80, I'll just read a section to 19 you here. He says: 20 "There was some type of confrontation 21 between a number of our officers and 22 the persons who were occupying the 23 Park. I was aware that one (1) or more 24 of our cruisers was damaged in the 25 process. And I -- and it was also my


1 understanding that at one (1) point the 2 trunk of a motor vehicle of one (1) of 3 the occupiers was opened, and that 4 there were long guns seen in the 5 trunk." 6 Do you recall that in your evidence? 7 A: I do. 8 Q: Yes. 9 A: That would be the night of September 10 4th. 11 Q: Yes. But you didn't see the guns 12 yourself, did you? 13 A: No. 14 Q: No. So if another officer who was 15 there tells us that the trunk was opened and all he saw 16 was the stock, the butt of a gun, or something that 17 looked like a butt, you -- you'd agree with me that his 18 evidence would be better than yours? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Thank you. 21 22 (BRIEF PAUSE) 23 24 Q: Now, sir, you also spoke about the 25 acquisition of an armoured personnel carrier, an APC?


1 A: Yes. I was asked questions about 2 that. 3 Q: Yes. And at that time you were asked 4 to identify somebody who could operate this type of 5 vehicle? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: And you'd agree with me, sir, that 8 going down to this area in full hard TAC and with all the 9 preparation that you had, not expecting anybody to fire 10 on you, that an armoured personnel carrier just might 11 have appeared to be sort of going a little over the edge? 12 What did you need it for? 13 A: We didn't have the armoured -- APC 14 that night, sir, so I -- 15 Q: I see. 16 A: -- don't know where your question is 17 headed. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, you also indicated to Ms. Vella 22 that you had two (2) functions that night; one of them 23 was to secure the parking lot and the other one was not 24 to enter the Park. 25 A: Correct.


1 Q: Yeah. Now when were you given those 2 instructions? 3 A: It was a -- a couple of times. One 4 was at the Forest Command site. 5 Q: Around what time? Your best 6 recollection? 7 A: It would be some time shortly after 8 9:00/ 10:00 p.m. 9 Q: On the night of the -- 10 A: September 6th. 11 Q: September 6th. 12 A: And -- and I can add that it was 13 clear even on the days before this, that we would not be 14 going into the Park. 15 Q: Well I don't know how -- what that 16 helps us as far as my question is concerned. I just 17 wanted to know when you were given this instruction and 18 you've told me it was September the 6th around nine 19 o'clock. 20 A: It wasn't the first time we had been 21 told that we're not going into the Park. 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: This -- this was our -- 24 Q: And when -- when before that were you 25 advised that you weren't going in the Park?


1 A: On our briefing when we first arrived 2 there, there was no intention or -- or request that 3 anyone go in the Park. 4 Q: I see. And do you know whether or 5 not that specific position was communicated to the 6 occupiers by anybody -- 7 A: I don't know, sir. 8 Q: -- at any time? 9 A: I don't know, sir. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Now finally Officer, in response to 14 some questions by Mr. Rosenthal, you indicated that as 15 far as this -- the Crowd Management Unit was concerned, 16 that everything down in the parking area was going to be 17 predicated on what you met there. 18 Do you remember responding like that to 19 Mr. Rosenthal a couple of minutes ago? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Yeah. But at the same time there was 22 a massive show of force; is that fair to say? 23 A: It was a show of force, yes it was. 24 Q: A serious show of force? 25 A: Well, I've been involved with a


1 couple of thousand officers which would pale compared to 2 forty (40), so... 3 Q: I see. So as far -- 4 A: It was a show of force, sir. 5 Q: But relative to what you -- relative 6 to the occupiers I understand that you were aware that 7 just -- there were just about thirty (30) or forty (40) 8 people in the Park? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: I see. Armed with perhaps sticks and 11 stones? 12 A: And bats and axes. 13 Q: Okay. Axes or axe handles? 14 A: Axe -- there was reports of a person 15 in the Park with an axe as well as axe handles. 16 Q: Reports. Had you seen that? 17 A: Myself? 18 Q: Yes. 19 A: No. 20 Q: Okay. So anyway whatever -- whatever 21 weapons these people had, they were short range weapons; 22 would you agree with that? As opposed to rifles and -- 23 which is a long range weapon? 24 A: Well they were blunt force weapons. 25 Q: Blunt force, yeah. So you went down


1 there fully prepared to take on and suppress the 2 occupiers; is that a fair statement? 3 A: No. We were fully prepared to secure 4 the public access area. 5 Q: Okay. Secured for what -- for what 6 purpose? What -- what was going to happen to it? 7 A: For the safety -- 8 Q: They weren't on the roadway were 9 they? 10 A: What is your question, sir? 11 Q: As far as the -- the public access is 12 concerned, was the roadway being blocked? 13 A: When we arrived there, no. 14 Q: No. So there was nothing to secure 15 on the roadway? 16 A: That's correct. 17 Q: And the Park was occupied by the 18 occupiers? 19 A: Yes. 20 Q: Yes. 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And nobody was going into the Park? 23 A: Of the officers, that's correct. 24 Q: Yeah. Or anybody else that you saw 25 was -- nobody was going into the Park?


1 A: Well, the occupiers would have 2 returned to the Park. 3 Q: Yes, the -- 4 A: But the police officers were not 5 going in the Park, that's correct. 6 Q: That is true. So then the only other 7 thing was the sandy parking lot? 8 A: Correct. 9 Q: On the north side there was the Camp? 10 North side of the sandy parking lot, correct? 11 A: North side -- 12 Q: South. Sorry, on the south side. 13 A: Further south, yes, the -- 14 Q: Yes. And -- 15 A: -- and on the east side is -- is the 16 Base. 17 Q: On the east was the Park, right? 18 A: From the sandy parking lot? 19 Q: Yes. 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: The north was the lake. 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: What was the purpose of securing it? 24 A: For the safety of -- of the people 25 living nearby.


1 Q: I see. And so you're saying that if 2 the occupiers had access to the sandy parking lot, the 3 people living on the west side of the sandy parking lot 4 would be at risk or could be at risk? 5 A: Could be depending upon what was 6 going on, yes. 7 Q: Yes. But you see earlier I asked you 8 if people had been walking down the road and on Matheson 9 Drive whether you would have arrested them and you told 10 me no. 11 A: Correct. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Hmm hmm. 13 14 CONTINUED BY MR. ANTHONY ROSS: 15 Q: Wouldn't they be in the same 16 proximity to the houses or the cottages if they are on 17 Matheson Drive? 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think 19 you've covered this area, Mr. Ross. I think you've gone 20 over this. You seem to be asking questions that I think 21 you've already asked. 22 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: I do not agree, 23 Commissioner, -- 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, that's 25 fine.


1 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: -- but I -- it was my 2 last question anyway. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: All right. 4 Go ahead. 5 MR. ANTHONY ROSS: Thank you very much, 6 Commissioner. 7 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 8 very much. 9 Yes, Mr. George...? Are you speaking on 10 behalf of the Chiefs as well? 11 MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: I am, Commissioner. 12 I -- I believe a quite lengthy estimate was given by Mr. 13 Scullion on our behalf last Thursday. I won't be long at 14 all, perhaps ten (10) minutes. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 16 Mr. George. 17 18 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: 19 Q: Good afternoon, Officer 20 Hebblethwaite. 21 A: Good afternoon. 22 Q: My name's Jonathan George and I 23 represent the Kettle and Stony Point First Nation and I'm 24 also appearing as agent for counsel to the Chiefs of 25 Ontario. There are just a couple of areas I wish to


1 canvass with you. 2 Initially and briefly, I just want to 3 clarify two (2) areas which are of importance to my 4 client. First of all, you indicated in your testimony to 5 Ms. Vella and I believe also to Mr. Falconer earlier 6 today that prior to you and the other CMU members 7 approaching the sandy parking lot on the evening of 8 September 6th you obtained some information with respect 9 to a damaged vehicle and you indicated you received that 10 information some time earlier that evening? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Do you recall giving that evidence? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Okay. And as -- as I reviewed your 15 testimony from Thursday I believe you indicated to Ms. 16 Vella that you overheard that initially by overhearing a 17 conversation between Korosec and Grant. 18 Do you recall giving that evidence? 19 A: Specifically, no. 20 Q: Okay. Well, perhaps you can just 21 tell us how you recall initially receiving that 22 information, if you can? 23 A: We were informed by Stan Korosec that 24 there was an incident. And I think specifically as to 25 how I became aware that it was a damaged private vehicle


1 I don't know that I specifically said who told us. I -- 2 I could be corrected here if I read through -- 3 Q: Okay. 4 A: -- my notes word for word. 5 Q: But is it your recollection that you 6 overheard that through a formal briefing with CMU 7 members, ERT members, and Stan Korosec? 8 A: That's -- that's possibly fair. It 9 would be some time after 7:35 p.m. 10 Q: Okay. Fair. Fair enough. You also 11 indicated to Ms. Vella that you hadn't heard any reports 12 at or around that time of AK-47's or mini-Rugers or 13 Molotov cocktails being in the Park? 14 A: Correct. 15 Q: Okay. And just briefly, and I may be 16 stating the obvious here, if you had in fact -- first of 17 all if there had in fact been confirmation that the 18 occupiers were in possession of that this mission you 19 talk about wouldn't have been appropriate for CMU, fair? 20 A: Correct. 21 Q: Okay. But I take it short of 22 confirmation, a suspicion or rumour or any suggestion 23 that there may be those kinds of things in the possession 24 of the occupiers that would have been information you as 25 a CMU member would have wanted to know nonetheless, fair?


1 A: It would have been nice to know but 2 having said that, sir, it was certainly a possibility, 3 all -- all the officers there that had worked in the area 4 throughout the month of August were aware of firearms 5 being shot on the -- on the Base and that was directly 6 adjacent to the Park. So now that the Park was occupied 7 with persons that had been on the Base it was certainly a 8 possibility. 9 Q: Fair enough. And -- and it's not my 10 intention to discount any individual officer's 11 observations over that relevant period of time but I'm 12 simply suggesting that if there was information, whether 13 it be in the nature of confirmation or perhaps even the 14 nature of rumour or suggestion that there were specific 15 weapons in the nature of AK-47's, that's something you 16 would want to know? 17 You'd want to at least have an awareness 18 of that prior to engaging in the mission you talked 19 about, fair? 20 A: The knowledge would have been useful, 21 yes. 22 Q: Okay. Now, moving on, Officer 23 Hebblethwaite, were you -- and -- and I apologize if you 24 gave this testimony already, were you personally 25 consulted in terms of -- were you asked by any -- any of


1 your superior officers where or not CMU involvement was 2 prudent in these circumstances? 3 A: No. 4 Q: Okay. You weren't asked questions in 5 the nature of when would be the appropriate time to 6 deploy or how to deploy? 7 A: No, sir. 8 Q: Okay. Now, you talked about 9 proceeding down the -- the East Parkway Drive in a box 10 formation and ultimately ending up in a -- in a cordon 11 formation. 12 A: Correct. 13 Q: Is that fair? Okay. And those kinds 14 of decisions, is it simply a given that you would proceed 15 in that fashion or were decisions made that that's how 16 you would, in fact, do it? 17 A: It's something that -- that you just 18 do naturally. If you're in an area where there's a wide 19 enough roadway and you -- you're not engaged with -- with 20 any crowd, traditionally you would walk in the box 21 formation. 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: If you're in the cordon formation, 24 that would be in preparation for contact with -- with an 25 aggressive, disorderly crowd.


1 Q: Okay. Now, again, I don't want to 2 rehash your testimony of Thursday and earlier today, but 3 you talked about what the mission was. And your mission 4 was to take control or secure the public access area 5 outside the Park. 6 Have I characterized that fairly? 7 A: Correct. 8 Q: Okay. Now, when you use terminology 9 like "secure" or "take control," what I take from that is 10 that that's not simply something isolated in time, but it 11 would require some action afterwards. 12 For instance, let me get this straight, 13 the goal of proceeding in the formation you did was to 14 hopefully give off the signal that you were there to do 15 something and that the occupiers would go back into the 16 Park, without any need for violence or altercation. 17 That was the hope, right? 18 A: That's part of it, yes. 19 Q: Okay. And if that had been achieved, 20 and I guess this is where my confusion lies, was there -- 21 was it part of the plan or the mission that officers 22 would remain there after that was achieved, to maintain 23 that security? 24 A: I didn't know what our task would be 25 once that was achieved.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: It may well have been. It may not 3 have been. 4 Q: Okay. In retrospect, given -- and I 5 ask you this: Given the fact that you were the second in 6 command, isn't that an integral part of a plan, wouldn't 7 you think? 8 If the goal is to secure, wouldn't it be 9 necessary to know what would happen after it was, in 10 fact, secured? 11 A: No, sir. 12 Q: No. Okay. Did you, in your mind, 13 have any clue as to what was to happen once that initial 14 security was gained? 15 A: I don't ever recall thinking what was 16 next. 17 Q: Okay. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, you've already given evidence 22 about the -- the formation; how you proceeded and how you 23 ended up in a cordon formation. 24 You gave evidence to several counsel about 25 the description of that formation and you described there


1 being a left cover squad, a right cover squad. I -- 2 maybe I'm using the wrong terminology, a contact or front 3 squad and then an arrest rear squad. 4 Do I have that correct? 5 A: I call it the -- you have the three 6 (3) correct. I call the rear squad is -- can be referred 7 to as an arrest squad or a support squad. 8 Q: Okay. And -- 9 A: In addition, on this particular 10 night, we did have the eight (8) supplementing officers 11 at the rear, dedicated as an arrest squad or hands on 12 squad -- 13 Q: Okay. 14 A: -- without shields. 15 Q: Okay. So the role was similar to 16 those in the rear squad, simply without shields? 17 A: Correct. 18 Q: Okay. Now, I take it that it's 19 predetermined, before you actually march down the road, 20 who's in each squad, right? 21 They're assigned? 22 A: Predetermined that night? 23 Q: That night. 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Okay. You, and/or Lacroix, assign


1 who's going to be in each particular squad, fair? 2 A: It happened. Yeah, the officers were 3 split up. 4 Q: Okay. 5 A: Generally, because there was two (2) 6 ERT teams and there was four (4) squads, one (1) ERT team 7 comprises one (1) or two (2) squads in the unit, and the 8 other team makes up the other two (2) squads. 9 Q: Okay. So you knew -- the goal being 10 that you -- those in command knew who was where, fair? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Okay. And you talked about, as you 13 were proceeding down the roadway, a report of a -- a 14 sighting of an occupier with a firearm. And you 15 described the officers taking cover on either side of the 16 road. 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. Is it predetermined -- is that 19 organized, and what I mean by that is -- is it 20 predetermined that, for instance, two (2) officers paired 21 together would go to either side of the road and kneel 22 together? Or how does that work? 23 A: Generally, the squads will split left 24 and right, oft -- more often than not, contact squad, 25 whatever way they go, generally to the left, and the left


1 cover squad will take that direction, and the right cover 2 squad and the arrest squad will go to the right. 3 Q: Okay. So it's easily -- it would be 4 easy to know which way each officer is going when cover 5 is needed? 6 A: Well left generally goes left, right 7 goes right, and the contact and arrest squads will go 8 opposite the other. 9 Q: Okay. And just moving on, Officer 10 Hebblethwaite, you describe the first punch out and a 11 subsequent retreat. Do you recall giving testimony with 12 respect to that? 13 Once you got down into the parking lot and 14 after you found yourself near the fence? 15 A: Yes. The first -- 16 Q: Okay. 17 A: -- punchout and then -- 18 Q: Well -- 19 A: -- my retreat or the individuals's 20 retreat that the punchout went after? 21 Q: Well, let me ask you this: The -- 22 I'm assuming that when you were approaching the fence, 23 everyone's remaining in formation, fair? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Where they're supposed to be and


1 where you know them to be, fair? 2 A: Fair. 3 Q: Okay. And upon in a retreat they're 4 remaining where they were; they're staying in formation? 5 Or is it a little unorganized at that point and they fall 6 back into formation? 7 A: It -- it was a little unorganized, as 8 I indicated, I believe, in-chief, that because of the 9 left cover squad had advanced, they were not in formation 10 as the unit was backing up. 11 And the contact squad was asked to wait or 12 pause for that unit to get into position then continue 13 the backup, so -- 14 Q: But it would -- it would be expected 15 that they'd returned to where they were in the initial 16 formation, fair? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Okay. Now I want to just take you 19 briefly, Officer Hebblethwaite, to your description of an 20 individual being arrested during the thick of it, if I 21 can put it that way, on September the 6th, okay? 22 And I believe Ms. Vella is the only one 23 who's questioned you on that in any great detail. And 24 you described last Thursday, you describe it in a context 25 of trying to get an appreciation of the scope of what was


1 going on, looking to your right and seeing an individual 2 being arrested. 3 Do you recall -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- giving that evidence? 6 A: I do. 7 Q: And you later, at some point 8 thereafter, learned that that individual's name was Cecil 9 Bernard George? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: Okay. Now I just -- I just want to 12 take you through the testimony you gave Ms. Vella. First 13 of all, you indicated that the individual -- the 14 individual you saw was on the ground on his back, and it 15 is -- sorry. 16 It's page 199. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 Q: You describe the individual you saw 21 being on the ground on his back, arms and legs. 22 A: That's correct. 23 Q: Do you recall giving that -- 24 A: Yes, I do. 25 Q: Okay. And at no point during this


1 period of observation did you see him anywhere than being 2 on his back? 3 A: Correct. 4 Q: Okay. You didn't see anything in his 5 hands? 6 A: No. 7 Q: You indicated that to Ms. Vella. 8 Okay. Now you also indicated to Ms. Vella that your 9 vision wasn't clear. I -- I don't want to paraphrase. I 10 think you said you didn't have a clear vision. Is that 11 how you recall it? 12 A: Correct. It wasn't a perfect -- it 13 wasn't perfectly clear what was happening. It was -- 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: -- it was -- the lighting was 16 sporadic, there was intermittent lighting from the 17 bonfires, the vehicles, the spotlights, a bit of a -- 18 three-quarter moon. 19 Q: Okay. And you -- you initially 20 described to Ms. Vella that it was a group of officers. 21 You later on in your testimony clarified that it was 22 maybe three (3) or four (4), but your initial description 23 was a group. 24 So I take it from that, combined with the 25 fact that you didn't have an overly clear vision of what


1 was occurring, that you're not overly certain as to how 2 many officers there were? 3 A: That's fair. 4 Q: Okay. And if I were to suggest to 5 you there were more than five (5), and perhaps closer to 6 ten (10), would you agree with that? 7 A: No, I wouldn't. 8 Q: Okay. Could you with any degree of 9 certainty dispute that? 10 A: Ten (10), absolutely I would dispute 11 that. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: Five (5), quite possible. Much more 14 than that, doubtful. 15 Q: Okay. But maybe more than five (5)? 16 A: Possibly. 17 Q: Now I -- I just, a few moments ago, 18 took you through -- and -- and I appreciate that at some 19 point it got chaotic so I -- I don't want to lose that 20 context and I appreciate that. 21 But I, a few moments ago, took you through 22 your knowledge, as Second in Command, as to who was 23 where, who was at each Squad, and who, in all likelihood, 24 would have been the initial contact with the occupiers? 25 Can you, based on what you knew then and


1 what you know now, can you with -- can you give us any 2 informed conclusion or opinion as to who that likely was, 3 coming into contact with the individual on his -- on the 4 ground on his back? 5 A: No, sir, I can't. 6 Q: Okay. Would you agree that, in all 7 likelihood, it was individuals in those last two (2) 8 groups? 9 A: It would be difficult for me to say. 10 It's quite possible. 11 Q: Sorry. Just -- just so I'm clear. 12 The -- the rear squad and the additional late officers; 13 that -- that's what I was referring to when I said that. 14 A: I believe in-chief, the fact that I 15 didn't see shields suggested that it could have been the 16 arrest squad at the very back, the additional eight (8) 17 officers. 18 Q: Okay. 19 A: But then again, it's quite possible 20 that those involved that were trying to put their hands 21 on the individual had dropped their shields. So -- 22 Q: Okay. 23 A: -- I can't -- I can't be certain. 24 Q: Okay. And finally, Constable 25 Hebblethwaite, you indicated to Ms. Vella that that


1 observation, that period of observation was around a 2 couple of seconds. I think that's the language you used. 3 Now I'm going to suggest to you, Officer 4 Hebblethwaite, that given the fact that you -- you were 5 able to observe initially, make an assessment, and I 6 believe you also uttered something to the officers about 7 how that not being an appropriate place to -- to effect 8 that arrest? 9 A: I -- 10 Q: What exactly did you say to -- to the 11 officers? 12 A: I simply yelled out to get him out of 13 there. 14 Q: Okay. Did you make further 15 statements about anything else other than get him out of 16 there? 17 A: That was it. 18 Q: Okay. Were you able to make any 19 assessment as to whether or not objects -- the -- the 20 objects being thrown that you described were falling in 21 that general area? 22 Were you able to make that observation 23 during that -- that period of time? 24 A: I couldn't be sure if they were or 25 weren't.


1 Q: Okay. And you also indicated earlier 2 in your testimony about something unrelated -- about -- 3 about the -- the event in -- in its entirety, that you 4 thought it was quite lengthy, but it was probably less 5 than what you thought it was -- 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: -- in terms of -- okay. And is it 8 possible that with respect to this narrow incident I'm 9 referring you -- you to that it was -- could have been 10 longer than two (2) seconds, that period of observation? 11 A: A couple or three (3) seconds would 12 be it. 13 Q: Okay. Those are my questions, 14 Officer Hebblethwaite. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 16 Mr. George. 17 MR. JONATHAN GEORGE: Thank you, 18 Commissioner. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Mr. 20 Alexander, do you have any questions? 21 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: I do have 22 questions, but should we take a break first or...? 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I suppose we 24 should take a break. How long do you think you might be, 25 Mr. Alexander so we can get some idea of what our next


1 witness is? 2 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: I estimated twenty 3 (20) to forty (40) minutes, I expect to be less than 4 twenty (20) minutes. 5 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Less than 6 twenty (20)? 7 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Probably ten (10) 8 to twenty (20). 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Do you have 10 any idea how long you might be, Ms. Jones? 11 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Just so you know our 12 next witness won't be here until tonight so... 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: So it 14 doesn't matter, we can't call him this afternoon. 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That's right. 16 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: But you 17 still -- could you give me some indication in any event, 18 just some indication? 19 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 20 think I might be thirty (30) to forty (40) minutes. 21 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 22 We'll take a break now then. 23 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 24 for fifteen (15) minutes. 25


1 --- Upon recessing at 3:39 p.m. 2 --- Upon resuming at 3:56 p.m. 3 4 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 5 resumed, please be seated. 6 MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: Good afternoon, Mr. 7 Commissioner. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 9 afternoon, Mr. Alexander. 10 11 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BASIL ALEXANDER: 12 Q: Good afternoon, Sergeant 13 Hebblethwaite. 14 A: Good afternoon, sir. 15 Q: My name is Basil Alexander and I'm 16 one (1) of the lawyers for the Estate of Dudley George 17 and several members of the George Family including Sam 18 George who is sitting here beside me and I have a couple 19 of areas to explore with you. Most of my areas have 20 been covered by My Friends prior to me. 21 The first one(1) I want to talk about is 22 the briefing in terms of a little bit of the timing. 23 Now, if I understand your evidence from earlier today 24 regarding the -- during the cross-examination of Mr. 25 Julian Falconer it's my understanding that you --


1 Sergeant Korosec ordered you to suit up in CMU hard TAC. 2 You realized you didn't have something 3 and you had to leave the Forest Detachment at 20:10 to go 4 back to Grand Bend to pick it up. At 20:27 you departed 5 the hotel and then you came back to -- in Grand Bend and 6 then you came back to the Forest Detachment at 20:40. 7 Does that sound correct? 8 A: Yes, it does. 9 Q: Okay. And as I understand it Highway 10 21 would have been the most direct route between Forest 11 and Grand Bend and I presume you took Highway 21 as your 12 route to get there? 13 A: Yes, I believe we did. 14 Q: Now, is Grand Bend about 30 15 kilometres away? 16 A: I'm not sure, sir. 17 Q: Okay. I did a -- a quick Google 18 local search and it seems to indicate that it's about 30 19 kilometres away. 20 Do you take any issue with that distance? 21 A: If Google says so, I agree. 22 Q: The almighty power of Google. Doing 23 some math then and using your notes of about thirteen 24 (13) minutes to travel back and you indicated that you 25 travelled at about the same speed on both -- during -- in


1 both directions that works out a speed of about 140 2 kilometres per hour. 3 Does that assist with refreshing your 4 memory at all about the speed you would have taken in 5 terms of travelling back and forth that evening? 6 A: I would have thought, excuse me, 30 7 kilometres in fifteen (15) minutes at 120 kilometres per 8 hour. You could go 30 kilometres in fifteen (15) 9 minutes. 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: So this is thirteen (13) minutes and 12 I'm not sure if Google's 30 kilometres isn't to the 13 centre of town or where it leads to so... 14 Q: No, that's fair enough but I'm just 15 trying to get an idea of what the speed -- 16 A: 140 is a little excessive in an 80 17 kilometre per hour zone -- 18 Q: So it might have been -- 19 A: -- 120 is not. 20 Q: So it might have been 120 to 140, 21 kind of thing? 22 A: Could have been. And I presume you 23 would have been driving a marked OPP cruiser? 24 A: Yes. I don't recall if I had roof 25 lights or not, but it certainly would have been a marked


1 cruiser otherwise. 2 Q: And were you ever told not to use 3 Highway 21 to go back and forth from Grand Bend to 4 Forest? 5 6 (BRIEF PAUSE) 7 8 A: I seem to recall that in general 9 terms there was a section of Highway 21 that was it was 10 recommended to stay away from. 11 On the night in question, I believe I used 12 it because it was the most direct route. I don't recall 13 not using it that night. 14 Q: Do you know what section that was 15 referred to? 16 A: There's a piece that goes right by 17 the -- the base. 18 19 (BRIEF PAUSE) 20 21 Q: Now, we heard in evidence, and this 22 is in Exhibit P-1321, that Sergeant Korosec called out 23 and requested the 3 and 6 District ERT teams to 10-19 to 24 Forest. 25 Now, based on the times that you've said,


1 you would have probably been en route from Forest to 2 Grand Bend at that point. 3 Do you recall hearing that radio 4 transmission at all? 5 A: No, I don't. 6 Q: Can you assist me with what would 7 have been the meaning of a 10-19 to Forest? 8 A: To attend to or go to Forest 9 Detachment. The order doesn't sound, in terms of the 10 time lines you're suggesting, doesn't sound correct. It 11 sounds -- we were pretty much all there at 7:35 p.m. 12 The one exception comes to mind is Officer 13 Spencer and there was another officer with him. They 14 were still having a position -- they were being relieved 15 from a position down at the beach, just west of the 16 public access area. 17 Q: But your recollection is the rest of 18 the 3 and 6 District ERT teams were at -- 19 A: Yeah. They were -- 20 Q: -- Forest Detachment? 21 A: If there was someone missing, it 22 would be a person or two (2), but the majority of the 23 thirty (30) somewhat officers would have been there 24 already by that time because we got, excuse me, a bit of 25 a briefing from Sergeant Korosec and we also had our


1 ASP's issued to us by Sergeant Grant. 2 And I have no recollection whatsoever of a 3 hoard of officers suddenly arriving. It was a matter of 4 us already being there, collected in the -- it was in the 5 garage. 6 Q: So as far as you can tell, it was 7 just yourself and the other constable that went with you 8 to Grand Bend; that everybody else from 3 and 6 District 9 ERT were -- was at the Detachment? 10 A: Would already have been there and for 11 that radio communication to go out just for myself and 12 Officer Weverink, I don't -- I suspect that didn't 13 happen. 14 If the transmission occurred, it would 15 likely have been prior to 7:35 p.m. or in that time line. 16 17 (BRIEF PAUSE) 18 19 Q: I'm just going to -- as far as we 20 know, we've heard no evidence with respect to the timing 21 of that transmission and, as far as we know, it is 22 accurate in terms of the evidence we've heard. 23 But that doesn't change your recollection 24 in -- or recollections in terms of whether or not other 25 people may have left early, or whether or not the


1 briefing was split into two (2), or anything like that? 2 A: That's correct, sir, that's not my 3 recollection. And I may -- I may not have -- I wasn't 4 very helpful in my response, and being that it was 5 primarily just logic in my brain, I should have stayed 6 away from presenting something I wasn't firm about. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: So I now -- now you've confused me. 11 In terms of what you're firm about, you're not firm as to 12 whether or not everybody was there? 13 A: I'm firm that everybody was there. 14 Q: Okay. 15 A: Or the vast majority of the officers 16 from Number 3 and Number 6 ERT teams were present. 17 Q: Okay. 18 A: During Sergeant Korosec's briefing, 19 or debriefing, and the ASP batons being issued shortly 20 thereafter. 21 Q: Okay. 22 A: In terms of the radio transmission, 23 it doesn't make sense to me that would have come after 24 that, but if the record indicates such, then I would -- I 25 couldn't disagree.


1 Q: You can't disagree. All right. 2 Okay. Now, I want to ask you a question about your 3 notes. Now generally, in terms of when you make your 4 notes, I presume you make entries when you encounter a 5 situation that you consider significant from a policing 6 or a public safety point of view. 7 Would that be correct? 8 A: That's fair. 9 Q: And I recall, from your evidence 10 yesterday, that you mentioned that you heard automatic 11 and semi-automatic gunfire. Do you recall that evidence 12 from yesterday, during your chief of Susan Vella? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Now I reviewed your notes, and for 15 the record it's Tab 2, Exhibit P-1476, Tab 7 at Exhibit 16 P-1481, Tab 10 at P-1484, and I can't find any mention of 17 either automatic or semi-automatic gunfire. Am I correct 18 in that? Or can you -- 19 A: You're correct. 20 Q: So it's fair to say that you didn't 21 view the sounds of either automatic or semi-automatic 22 gunfire significant enough to note or report up, correct? 23 A: It was so commonplace it -- it just 24 wasn't noteworthy, that's correct; to me. 25 Q: But you would agree with me that


1 there's a distinction between semi-automatic gunfire and 2 automatic gunfire? 3 A: Yes. 4 Q: And you reportedly heard automatic 5 gunfire and you made no record of it. 6 A: Right. 7 Q: Can you assist us with any specific 8 times that you heard automatic gunfire? 9 A: I'm sorry, I can't. 10 Q: I'm going to suggest to you, sir, 11 that you were perhaps a little imprecise in saying that 12 you heard automatic gunfire. 13 A: I would disagree, sir. I've fired 14 fully automatic 50 calibre weapons, semi-autic -- FNC- 15 1A2's (phonetic), the military weapon, the OPP's FN's, 16 the Rugers, which were, I believe, post -- no, I'm sorry, 17 they were pre -- pre '95, so the semi-automatic Ruger. 18 So I know the difference between fully- 19 automatic weapons and semi-automatics. 20 Q: But as you indicated yesterday, you 21 never saw any such weapons, correct? 22 A: Correct. 23 Q: And you didn't put it in your notes, 24 and you didn't report it, and you didn't report it up, 25 correct?


1 A: Correct. 2 Q: Thank you, Sergeant Hebblethwaite, 3 those are my questions. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you, 5 Mr. Alexander. 6 Ms. Jones...? 7 8 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. KAREN JONES: 9 Q: Good afternoon, Officer 10 Hebblethwaite. Mr. Commissioner, we were just taking 11 some comfort and hoping we could take your earlier 12 comment to mean it's not too much to be going 120 in an 13 80 click zone. We were thinking that would be pretty 14 good. 15 I just wanted to follow up on some 16 questions that you've been asked by counsel over a couple 17 of days. In terms of the questions you were just asked 18 about, automatic and semi-automatic fire, did you hear 19 both automatic fire and semi-automatic gunfire during the 20 summer of 1995? 21 A: Yes, I did. 22 Q: Okay. And during the course -- and 23 would that have been while you were on duty at Ipperwash? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: And would it have been usual or


1 unusual to hear that sound while you were on duty? 2 A: It was usual. 3 Q: You were also asked some questions 4 about the confirmation of AK-47's and other weapons, and 5 whether that would have had any particular meaning to you 6 or significance on the night of September the 6th. 7 And I just wanted to ask you some 8 questions about confirmation of weapons or how you would 9 evaluate information coming in about weapons. 10 And first of all, can -- can you help me 11 out, are -- are there different ways that you would 12 categorize information that you might get from other 13 people? 14 A: Well typically, what I -- what I'm 15 used to, and which is -- is a common way of -- of 16 defining intelligence information, or information, I've 17 used the terms UR, BR and CR. 18 UR standing for unknown reliability, which 19 is -- could be considered, I suppose, pure rumour and 20 gossip. 21 BR meaning believed reliable. It could be 22 from an unproven source but with no current reason to 23 doubt. And completely reliable could extend from 24 anything from a -- from a source that has been 100 25 percent reliable over a period of time, to photographs or


1 to direct conversation with someone of unimpeachable 2 credentials. 3 Q: Okay. And in terms of on the night 4 of September the 6th and your views or understanding 5 about whether or not there were weapons in the Park, I 6 take it you've told us that you had had personal 7 experience of hearing gunfire? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: And others had had reports of that? 10 A: Correct. 11 Q: And you had heard a report about a 12 long gun in a -- in a vehicle on September the 4th? 13 A: September 4th, yes. 14 Q: Okay. And what kind -- in terms of 15 the category -- categories that you've described, the 16 "UR", the "BR", and the "CR" if any of those criteria had 17 been met on the night of September the 6th as far as new 18 information, would that have changed your view about the 19 appropriateness of -- of the CMU being deployed? 20 A: Well, using those ratings if it had 21 been "CR" or completely reliable, yes, that would have 22 changed my view -- 23 Q: Okay. 24 A: -- on the operation. 25 Q: Okay. You were asked some questions


1 by Mr. Rosenthal about your testifying at Ken Deane's 2 trial and I had some questions to follow up about that 3 area. 4 Is it usual or unusual in your role as a 5 police officer to be called on to testify at trials? 6 A: It's quite normal. 7 Q: And could you be called by the Crown 8 or called by the Defence or either? 9 A: I'm subject to -- to be either. 10 Generally it's -- it's the Crown. 11 Q: Okay. And can you help us when you 12 are testifying at a trial is that considered part of your 13 job? 14 A: Yes, it is. 15 Q: And is that generally paid duty? 16 A: I'm on duty so -- 17 Q: You're on duty so it's paid? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. You were asked a question 20 about whether or not you had a goal of assisting with the 21 defence at Ken Deane's trial and I wanted to ask you and 22 -- and you had confirmed that. 23 I wanted to ask you, does that mean that 24 you were participating as a witness in Ken Deane's trial 25 or does that mean something else to you?


1 A: It means I was participating as a 2 witness. I was -- I was aware that I could have been 3 called up by either the Crown or the Defence at that 4 particular trial, I ended up being called by the -- by 5 the Defence. 6 Q: Would your evidence have changed 7 regardless of who you were testifying for, the Crown or 8 the Defence? 9 A: Absolutely not. Absolutely not. 10 11 (BRIEF PAUSE) 12 13 Q: Is it usual or unusual when you are 14 to testify at a trial to be interviewed or to review your 15 evidence with the lawyer that's calling you? 16 A: No, it is not and I -- of interest to 17 the Inquiry when I was reviewing my notes for my 18 testimony last week and this week on that point, I noted 19 that I made entries just simply indicating I was -- 20 arrival time at -- in this -- and I say as an example Mr. 21 Peel's office/residence and departure. No notes 22 pertaining to the substance of what was discussed. 23 And interestingly as I'm flipping through 24 my notes I was -- I also had an entry, I believe it was 25 March 4th, in Stratford when I sat with the Crown


1 Attorney on a matter related to Ipperwash. So I had a 2 meeting on that date as well. 3 So it was with Defence Counsel on -- on 4 some dates and with Crowns and it's -- it's quite 5 consistent with my duties as a police officer. 6 Q: Okay. And it would be -- would it be 7 usual or unusual for you as a police officer to attend 8 when a verdict is given at a trial? 9 A: Oh, it's usual for me. I -- I've 10 gone to decisions in -- in a lot of cases that I needn't 11 have to be there but I have an interest. I -- I care 12 about the outcome of -- of the trials that I've been 13 involved in and I like to hear the results. 14 Q: Okay. In terms of the timing it was 15 noted by Mr. Falconer that for your notes of September 16 the 6th there are a few entries where you have given 17 specific times for events occurring such as when you go 18 to Grand Bend and that kind of thing. 19 And I wondered if you could give us a -- a 20 bit of assistance because I know when you were giving 21 your evidence on the first day you talked a little bit 22 about having a scratch pad and that would be something 23 that you might jot down notes or some significant 24 information on. 25 Was that scratch pad kept in your


1 cruiser? 2 A: Yes, there -- there's a specific 3 piece of hardware that's mounted to the dash of our 4 police cruisers and on that is a small dash pad, similar 5 in size to this. 6 It's lined paper and very often when I'm 7 driving, and if you're dispatched to a call or given a 8 licence plate to -- to look out for a specific vehicle 9 for whatever reason, oftentimes it's safest and simplest 10 to jot it down on the -- on the dash pad note versus 11 pulling out your notebook and attempting to do something 12 like this while you're driving which absolutely -- it's 13 impossible. 14 And then subsequent to taking any action 15 or when the opportunity presents that it's reasonable to 16 make an entry in your notebook, sit and write and look up 17 what the time on the dash pad, jot that in and away you 18 go. 19 It's convenience and nothing more. 20 Q: You had mentioned in your notes and 21 if you want to check, you can. It's at your Tab 21. And 22 it's at page 31 of that and Tab 10 is Exhibit 1484, Mr. 23 Commissioner. 24 You had a note in there about observing 25 the helicopter over the Park?


1 A: I recall that. 2 Q: Can you tell us what you recall about 3 how high the helicopter was flying? 4 5 (BRIEF PAUSE) 6 7 A: I didn't perceive it to be low. 8 There's nothing remarkable to me about it. In my mind's 9 eye I -- I would have been shocked if it was anything 10 less than 400 or 500 feet. 11 Q: Well -- well-above -- 12 A: Above -- 13 Q: -- the trees? 14 A: Oh, yes. 15 Q: Okay. 16 A: Yeah. 17 Q: You were asked some questions by Ms. 18 Vella on the first day of your evidence and she had asked 19 you a couple of questions about the crowd or the group of 20 people that you saw at the TOC on the evening of 21 September the 6th and she had asked you about how you 22 would have categorized that group of people in accordance 23 with the CMU training and way of evaluating crowds. 24 And she also asked you whether or not you 25 had any concern that you or Sergeant Wright might lose


1 control of the crowd. 2 And your answers were a little bit terse 3 to her in terms of saying no. 4 I just wondered if we could go back and 5 maybe you could explain to us a little bit about how you 6 evaluated the group at the TOC. 7 A: Yes. The persons that were gathered 8 were, again, clearly upset. Clearly there with a single 9 purpose to find out what was going on and to voice 10 concerns about apparent police inactivity. 11 Q: Right. 12 A: There didn't exist a sense to me that 13 this was on the verge of getting out of hand. There 14 wasn't obvious and direct disrespect being shown to 15 Officer Wright. 16 There was no weapons in the hands of -- of 17 the people that had gathered in the -- in the TOC area. 18 So as much as it was -- it certainly could 19 have gone sour but it didn't and there was no indication 20 that it was about to get that way. 21 There was certainly a group of people that 22 were gathered for a common purpose to obtain information 23 and to voice concerns. 24 But again, it didn't -- it had no signs of 25 getting any more serious than that to me.


1 Q: And I take it from your evidence that 2 the people who were there were prepared to talk to you 3 and to talk to Sergeant Wright? 4 A: Yes. Again, I didn't talk to -- to 5 the large group as a whole. 6 Q: Right. 7 A: Acting Staff Sergeant -- Detective 8 Staff Sergeant Wright did. 9 Q: Hmm hmm. 10 A: I didn't. 11 Q: Okay. And he was having a discussion 12 with people? That was something that you observed? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: And you had a discussion with -- with 15 the woman that you spoke with? 16 A: Yes. 17 Q: And you've told us no one was 18 carrying weapons? 19 A: Correct. 20 Q: You've told us or actually you 21 didn't. Was any -- were any of the people there cursing 22 and swearing at you? 23 A: No. 24 Q: Were any of the people there throwing 25 things at you?


1 A: No. 2 Q: Were any of the people there being 3 confrontational or attacking you? 4 A: They were being assertive as far as 5 wanting to know what we were doing and what was going on 6 and the fact that they wanted something done. 7 So they were being assertive in that way, 8 but beyond that, no. 9 Q: Okay. And Mr. Falconer suggested or 10 used the language "negotiate" in terms of your speaking 11 with the woman that you talked to and what Detective 12 Sergeant Wright was doing with the crowd. 13 Did you view that as negotiating? 14 A: No. I wouldn't characterize it as 15 that. 16 Q: Okay. And in terms of it was put to 17 you that, I think, that you would talk to that group of 18 people at the MNR parking lot but then didn't make the 19 same efforts in the sandy parking lot later on on the 20 night of September the 6th. 21 Did you see the situations as being at 22 all analogous? 23 A: No, I did not. 24 Q: And why was that? 25 A: Well, we were -- we had been -- had -


1 - had objects thrown at us, persons were standing around 2 with bats, poles, clubs, pipes. There didn't -- didn't 3 appear to be anyone that wanted to talk. 4 We were being talked at but there wasn't 5 the sense that anyone there was prepared to talk and due 6 to the fact that we were receiving those thrown objects 7 it -- it wasn't an environment where you could with any 8 ease walk up and speak to someone had they come to the 9 fence line to -- to try and speak with us. 10 Q: And no one did in any event? 11 A: No. 12 Q: To -- to speak with you? Okay. 13 A: No. Not -- not -- no. 14 Q: Okay. 15 16 (BRIEF PAUSE) 17 18 Q: You had been asked some questions by 19 Ms. Vella about the ASP batons and the distribution of 20 ASP batons on September the 6th, 1995. 21 So far as you knew did all of the ERT 22 members who were present get ASP batons that night? 23 A: As far as I knew, yes. 24 Q: Okay. When you were in the -- at the 25 TOC, the MNR TOC on the evening of September the 6th


1 you've talked a little bit about getting confirmation of 2 your instructions about what your mission was to be that 3 night. 4 Do you recall whether John Carson was 5 there when you were getting those instructions or -- or 6 whether he was in that area? 7 A: He was there. I -- I don't believe 8 he participated, he could have, but everyone that was 9 involved in that operation as I -- as I recall was 10 gathered in the open outside of the small, physical TOC 11 building. 12 Q: Okay. 13 A: You couldn't get anymore than 14 comfortably probably five (5) or six (6) people in there 15 but the rest of us were all outside. We were huddled 16 around. Staff Sergeant Lacroix reiterated what our 17 objective was, what the mission was. 18 Q: Okay. 19 A: And I'm -- I'm as certain as I can be 20 without putting it at 100 percent that the Inspector was 21 there as well and probably had words but I don't have 22 independent recollection or anything in my notebook that 23 he actually did speak to us directly. I suspect that he 24 did but I can't be certain on that -- on that piece. 25 Q: Okay. You've talked a little bit


1 about when you were in the sandy parking lot on the 2 evening of September the 6th hearing cursing and yelling 3 and -- and screaming coming in your direction from the 4 occupiers. 5 Did you hear any OPP officers responding 6 with any kind of cursing or swearing or talking back or 7 responding to that? 8 A: Absolutely not. 9 Q: Okay. You talked a little bit about 10 -- in your evidence just briefly about seeing a gas bomb 11 or something similar on fire being thrown on the night of 12 September the 6th, can you tell us a little bit further 13 or describe to us what it was you saw? 14 A: If I can go to the words that I used 15 so that I don't deviate from that. 16 Q: Okay. 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 A: I described it as a small firebomb or 21 a white flare. I -- I couldn't make out clearly what it 22 was. It -- it was burning and it landed to my right. 23 Q: Okay. 24 A: It was -- it was ahead of the right 25 Cover Squad.


1 Q: Okay. 2 A: And some officers in that -- in that 3 unit kicked sand and put it out. 4 Q: Okay. I just had a couple more 5 questions about in the sandy parking lot on the evening 6 of September the 6th. 7 I think that, first of all, you talked 8 about being up at the fence and retreating, is that 9 right? 10 A: Backing up, yes. 11 Q: Backing up. And as you back up 12 someone comes out of the Park and there is a left 13 punchout? 14 A: Yes. The contact squad itself, as 15 evidenced by the transcript, was asked to back up. The 16 unit itself -- 17 Q: That's right. 18 A: -- at that point had not been -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: -- asked to back up. 21 Q: Okay. 22 A: The left cover squad advanced on the 23 individual who came through the turnstile with the pole 24 that he had, or whatever it was that he was waving at us. 25 And just after the left cover squad advanced, this


1 individual ran back into the Park. 2 And then the whole unit started to back up 3 with the left cover squad being somewhat out of position 4 and then getting back in, and the unit backed up. 5 Q: Okay. And you had been asked a 6 couple questions this morning by Ms. Vella about a dog 7 and when you saw a dog, and I just want to make sure that 8 I have the sequence of events right. 9 You talked about after the left punchout, 10 as you were retreating; is that right? 11 A: Backing up, yes. 12 Q: Backing up. And when you -- when the 13 dog came out, did the dog come out before the occupiers 14 came out of the Park or did it come out with or during 15 that period of time? 16 A: It was during. It was before the 17 actual clash. There were -- the occupiers were over the 18 fence, into the sandy parking lot -- 19 Q: Okay. 20 A: -- at the time. 21 Q: And as the occupiers were coming 22 towards you while you were retreating, do you recall if 23 they were saying anything or what their demeanour was 24 like as they were coming towards you? You've talked 25 about the waving of weapons.


1 Was there anything that you heard at that 2 time? 3 A: I don't recall hearing any words. It 4 was just an advance -- people advancing on us. Again, it 5 was a rather surreal situation with the lighting, the way 6 -- way that it was, and the dust that we had kicked up by 7 moving backwards. 8 We had actually come to a stop before the 9 -- before we engaged these people. And I don't recall 10 what, if any words were being spoken or yelled at us, but 11 it was a very eery scene where -- where this -- this 12 group of silhouettes was advancing at us with -- with 13 identifiable weapons in their hands that were -- it was 14 all backlit from the fires and the vehicles behind us. 15 And as they approached and were -- it was 16 almost instantaneous when I heard a bang or -- or a 17 thwack with a shield as to when the unit got a go. So 18 the people were within arm's length of the contact squad 19 when the unit rushed forward as one (1) go -- which is 20 also in the transcripts, it says, "Go, go, go". 21 And we rushed forward and engaged the 22 people that had come over the fence. 23 Q: You were asked some questions by Mr. 24 Rosenthal about the intentions of the occupiers. And 25 from what you've told us, Officer, the times that the


1 occupiers came out and attacked you was when you were 2 leaving or when you were retreating or withdrawing -- 3 A: That's correct. 4 Q: -- is that right? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: In your view, is that consistent with 7 defending the Park, to attack you as you're leaving or 8 retreating or withdrawing? 9 A: No, it's not consistent. 10 Q: Okay. I had one (1) other question 11 for you about the CMU and that is, was it a standard 12 operating procedure or was it part of the CMU training as 13 the CMU would move forward to be chanting, Move back, 14 Move back, as they moved along? 15 A: No. That's -- that's some of the old 16 stuff from the 80's. That's not something current. 17 Q: Okay. When you were on East Parkway 18 after the incident in sandy parking lot and you and the 19 other officers were retreating, I think you told us that 20 you were out or almost at the road when you got attacked; 21 is that right? 22 A: Yes. 23 Q: And, again, that's an instance where 24 you're retreating and moving away? 25 A: Yes. That was the second time.


1 Q: The second time. 2 A: That was after the major clash, when 3 we were backing up. 4 Q: Okay. In terms of the car that came 5 from the Park and which you saw drive into officers, can 6 you tell us whether you could clearly see, once the car 7 had driven into the officers and then had backed up a 8 bit, I think you told us that's when you were lined up 9 with it and you were prepared to shoot at the car? 10 A: Yes. 11 Q: At that time, could you clearly see 12 the driver's side of the car? 13 A: No, I could not. 14 Q: Okay. You were also asked some 15 questions at -- on the night of September the 6th at 16 about 24:00 hours when you're back at the command post in 17 Forest, and if you want to have a look at your notes, 18 Officer, it's Tab 10 at page 47 of your notes. 19 And there was some questions about why 20 didn't you turn in your weapon at that point in time. 21 And can you -- can you tell us, were you 22 still operational; were you still on duty when you were-- 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: -- back at the TOC? 25 A: Yes, we were.


1 Q: Would it be usual or unusual for you 2 to hand in part of your kit while you were still 3 operational? 4 A: It had not happened to me before but 5 I would have found it unusual. 6 Q: Okay. 7 8 (BRIEF PAUSE) 9 10 Q: And I had one(1) other question to 11 ask you about -- I'm sorry, about the crowd management 12 training and I keep on telling you I'm done and I'm not. 13 You had talked a little bit about 14 identifying a leader and potentially, given the dynamics 15 of the crowd, seeing if that leader could be arrested or 16 moved away from the rest of the crowd as a way of 17 diffusing. 18 In terms of the CMU training, how would 19 you define a leader of the crowd? Would it be based on 20 your observations of the crowd at the time, who's 21 directing it, who's sort of fomenting or inflaming the 22 situation? 23 Or would -- what would you look for? 24 A: It could be a combination of a number 25 of things, that being one(1) of them. Somebody obviously


1 walking around the crowd, talking to people, apparently 2 inciting others to do certain things. 3 It could be as obvious as someone standing 4 up front saying, we're not going to take this. Come on, 5 let's go get them. Whatever. Something very obvious in 6 that regard or it could be something that was known in 7 advance, some type of intelligence or -- or oftentimes, 8 on the -- depending on the nature of the gathering, clear 9 leaders will speak with the police command staff prior 10 to, to set down parameters for their -- for their 11 gathering limits. 12 Q: Okay. And those are my questions, 13 Officer. Thank you. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 15 very much, Ms. Jones. 16 Ms. Vella, do you have any questions? 17 18 (BRIEF PAUSE) 19 20 MS. SUSAN VELLA: I have no re- 21 examination, but I would like at this time to thank Staff 22 Sergeant Hebblethwaite for coming today and Thursday and 23 providing your testimony to the Commission. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'd like to 25 repeat that as well. Thank you very much for coming and


1 giving us your testimony. Thank you very kindly. 2 THE WITNESS: Thank you, sir. 3 4 (WITNESS STANDS DOWN) 5 6 MS. SUSAN VELLA: And then just before we 7 break, we were advised with respect to the Motion that 8 was filed this morning by ALST that all counsel are 9 available to appear at the conclusion of the evidence on 10 Tuesday, May 23rd and so if it meets with your approval, 11 we propose that the Motion be heard at that time. 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: On Tuesday 13 at the end of the -- 14 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Evidence. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: -- day's 16 evidence. 17 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Correct. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If that 19 meets with everybody's approval and schedules, that's 20 fine with me. So we'll do that on Tuesday, May 23rd it 21 is, right? 22 MS. SUSAN VELLA: That's correct, May the 23 23rd. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine 25 and we're going to have a regular Court date today,


1 starting at 10:00 and finishing at 4:30. 2 We'll adjourn for the day and start 3 tomorrow morning at nine o'clock. Thank you very much. 4 MS. SUSAN VELLA: Thank you. 5 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 6 adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday May the 16th at 9:00 7 a.m. 8 9 --- Upon adjourning at 4:32 p.m. 10 11 12 13 Certified Correct 14 15 16 17 18 ________________________ 19 Carol Geehan 20 21 22 23 24 25