|
Jaime
Wheeler
| Denver
Crawford
| Wilf
Hathway | RCMP "culture of
silence" | Can Curtis
Dagenais get a fair trial? | Arthur
Dagenais' civil claim of malicious prosecution against the RCMP
James Driskell,
2006
Previous |
Driskell Inquiry Transcripts | Background
piece by Dan Lett | Ewatsky
takes the stand at Driskell Inquiry |
Reports on this page are
in descending order
---------
Crown attorney screamed
at me, lawyer for key witness testifies at Driskell inquiry
By The Canadian Press, August 4, 2006
WINNIPEG - The lawyer for a key witness
against James Driskell says he was shoved by officers and screamed
at by a Crown attorney in 1991 when he advised his client not
to talk to police.
David Kovnats, the lawyer for Ray Zanidean,
told the inquiry looking into Driskell's wrongful conviction
for murder that the incident took place just 16 days before Zanidean
took the stand.
Kovnats said Thursday that he told his
client he did not have to talk to anyone but the trial judge.
"It was after that that (Crown attorney
George) Dangerfield started yelling and screaming, got in my
face, told me I was going to be charged with obstruction,"
Kovnats testified.
"The whole situation was scary.
George Dangerfield was within an inch of my nose, he was yelling
and screaming . . . I'm grabbed by a couple of policemen and
shoved into a room. I haven't been in any kind of tussle since
I was a little kid."
Kovnats, whose law practice is usually
centred on commercial law and real estate, said he jammed a table
under the door knob while he used his cellphone to try to call
another lawyer for help.
Although he could not identify any of
the police officers involved, Kovnats said Dangerfield later
apologized to him.
Dangerfield's lawyer, Jay Prober, objected
to Kovnats' testimony, but Driskell's lawyer, James Lockyer,
said the incident helps establish the credibility of Dangerfield
when he testifies.
Driskell spent 12 years behind bars for
the murder of his friend, Perry Dean Harder.
Four years ago, Driskell's conviction
was quashed by the federal Justice Department after DNA tests
proved hairs used to convict him were not Harder's.
Much of the inquiry so far has focused
on the testimony of Zanidean, who said he saw Driskell kill Harder.
However, the inquiry has been told that
Zanidean was paid more than $80,000 by Manitoba Justice for his
testimony and was promised immunity on an arson he had confessed
to.
Driskell's trial lawyer, Greg Brodsky,
was never told about the deal and it has been suggested he could
have used that information to discredit Zanidean on the stand.
---
Zanidean
Manitoba: Immunity granted
for key testimony
Thursday, August 03, 2006
A senior Manitoba Justice official promised
Ray Zanidean immunity from prosecution for a Saskatchewan arson
in December of 1990 - six months before he was the key witness
at James Driskell's murder trial, Zanidean's lawyer David Kovnats
said yesterday. The promise came from the late Bruce Miller,
then Manitoba's director of prosecutions, Kovnats told an inquiry
into Driskell's wrongful conviction for killing Perry Dean Harder.
© The Gazette (Montreal) 200
---
Winnipeg police sergeant
didn't expect Mountie 'to lie': Driskell inquiry
CBC, August 2, 2006
A former Winnipeg police sergeant has
accused an RCMP officer of lying and fabricating reports during
testimony at the inquiry into the wrongful conviction of James
Driskell.
Driskell spent 12 years behind bars for
a 1990 murder before the federal justice minister quashed his
conviction last year.
One of recurring themes so far in the
inquiry, which began July 17, has been miscommunication between
the RCMP and the Winnipeg Police in relation to the treatment
of Ray Zanidean, who was an important and controversial witness
at Driskell's trial.
The inquiry has heard that Zanidean demanded
and received tens of thousands of dollars and other perks in
exchange for his questionable testimony, while threatening to
change his story or recant altogether. Driskell's lawyers and
the jury at his trial were not made aware of the deals, the inquiry
was told.
Officers for the RCMP and Winnipeg police
don't agree on how an immunity deal was reached for Zanidean,
who was wanted by the RCMP in Saskatchewan for an arson.
Retired Winnipeg police sergeant Tom
Anderson told the inquiry Tuesday that it was a Saskatchewan
RCMP officer who offered to delay an investigation into the arson
in Swift Current, Sask. The RCMP officer, Ross Burton, previously
testified it was police in Winnipeg who offered the immunity
deal.
In questioning Anderson, Driskell's lawyer,
James Lockyer, asked about Burton, who testified in the inquiry's
first days.
"Burton told us that in the first
call with you, sir, he got an immediate impression of you being
deceitful and dishonest how come?"
Anderson replied that he didn't know
and that it seemed to him that Burton misunderstood and misrepresented
most everything he had ever said.
"It's as if Const. Burton was speaking
one language, and I was speaking another," he said.
'Didn't expect an RCMP officer to lie'
Lockyer then pointed out several holes
in Anderson's documentation about Zanidean and asked Anderson
why he hadn't kept better notes.
"I was a little more naive in those
days than I am today. I expected an RCMP officer to keep his
word and not lie," Anderson said.
"I didn't approach investigations
as if there would be an inquiry 16 years later and that someone
who could confirm my evidence would be dead. I didn't expect
an RCMP officer to lie and falsify reports. So I may have taken
fewer notes than I would today, if I was doing this again."
The senior prosecutor in the Driskell
case has died since the case was tried.
Driskell's first-degree murder conviction
for the 1990 killing of Perry Dean Harder was quashed in 2005
after he had served more than 12 years in prison.
The justice minister cited several reasons
for his decision, including new DNA evidence that showed hairs
found in Driskell's van did not belong to the victim - as the
Crown argued at trial - as well as problems with key witnesses
and a lack of disclosure of information that could have helped
Driskell's defence.
The Manitoba government then stayed the
charges against Driskell, which keeps him out of prison but does
not officially exonerate him.
The inquiry is probing the role of police,
the actions of the Crown and questions of disclosure in the case.
The commissioner has also been asked to determine when someone
has met the threshold to be declared factually innocent or wrongly
convicted.
The inquiry is expected to run another three weeks.
With files from the Canadian Press
---
Mountie accused of
lying at Driskell probe
By Nick Martin, Tuesday, August 1
A lead investigator into Perry Dean Harder's
murder accused an RCMP officer Tuesday morning of lying about
the events that led to Ray Zanidean getting immunity for an arson
charge before he testified against James Driskell in 1991.
Retired city police homicide sergeant
Tom Anderson told the inquiry into Driskell's wrongful conviction
that it was Swift Current RCMP Const. Ross Burton who offered
to delay pursuing an arson investigation until Zanidean had testified
in the murder trial against Driskell.
Burton has previously testified that
Winnipeg police pressed for immunity against the arson charge.
Anderson said this morning that he would
never have asked any police agency to hold off on criminal charges.
"That was coming out at the trial, come hell or high water,"
said Anderson, stressing several times that police do not 'buy'
testimony by having other charges stayed.
"I was a little more naive than
I am now. I expected an RCMP officer to keep his word, and not
lie," Anderson said. "It's as if Const. Burton was
speaking one language, and I was speaking another."
RCMP lawyer David Gates was incredulous
that Anderson would claim to accept the immunity deal solely
on the basis of a phone call with a constable he'd never met,
after Anderson said such a deal in Manitoba would require the
approval of the justice department.
"It allowed you to fulfil one of Mr. Zanidean's conditions
for becoming your most important witness," Gates said.
Gates pointed out that Anderson was the
only Manitoban to deal with Burton, and that senior police and
Crown attorneys here relied on what Anderson was reporting to
them.
Anderson said that, because RCMP in Winnipeg
needed Zanidean to be free of charges before going into witness
protection, he assumed others here were talking to Saskatchewan
officials.
The 10th day of the inquiry into Driskell's
wrongful conviction for Harder's murder pitted Driskell lawyer
James Lockyer against Anderson.
Lockyer alleged that Anderson and his
retired partner sergeant Albert Paul had created stories after
the fact and were part of a police and Crown culture that led
them to believe "that you thought you could get away with
everything."
"You're dead wrong about that, Mr.
Lockyer," Anderson replied time after time after time.
Anderson agreed with Lockyer that many
events and meetings did not go into his notes or reports, but
said he had not foreseen that an inquiry would be held 15 years
later at which he would be expected to have documented every
move he made.
"I didn't expect an RCMP officer
to lie or falsify reports," Anderson said, nor did he expect
that someone would die who could have corroborated his version
of events - the late Bruce Miller, then Manitoba's director of
prosecutions.
Paul testified Monday that Miller told Anderson and Paul several
days before Zanidean's testimony at Driskell's trial on June
11, 1991, that he had arranged immunity for Zanidean through
Saskatchewan justice.
Paul told the hearing that Miller had
ordered them not to tell Zanidean prior to his giving evidence
at the murder trial, so that, Paul believed, the jury would not
question Zanidean's credibility.
Anderson said Miller was among several
officials who favoured keeping Zanidean's immunity from him before
he testified at Driskell's trial.
Lockyer threw at Anderson an accusation
that Anderson and Paul told Zanidean and another witness to call
Crime Stoppers, so that they would get a reward after already
co-operating with police.
"You do not see that as corrupt?"
Lockyer asked.
"I don't think it was seen as corrupt.
It may have happened. It's the kind of scenario where that could
have happened," Anderson replied.
Lockyer alleged that the case had "a
lot of fishy practices."
Anderson remains on the witness stand
this afternoon.
-----
Driskell Inquiry update
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
31, 2006
A lawyer is questioning whether cops
ever met with a top justice official who supposedly detailed
a hush-hush immunity deal for a star witness in the original
James Driskell trial.
Retired Winnipeg police Sgt. Al Paul
told lawyers for the Driskell Inquiry that he went to a meeting
with senior Crown attorney Bruce Miller around the time key witness
Ray Zanidean testified against Driskell in June 1991 for the
murder of Perry Harder.
It was at this meeting, Paul told the
inquiry, that Miller said Zanidean wouldn't be charged for torching
a Saskatchewan home, and outlined instructions not to tell Zanidean
about the plan until after he testified against Driskell.
"I suggest you never had a meeting
with Mr. Miller," said Driskell lawyer, Alan Libman. Paul
said several times that he and his partner met with Miller to
discuss the deal, although he can't remember the date or the
length of the meeting and didn't make any notes about it.
Since officer's notebooks and reports
are used to communicate with Crown attorneys, police union lawyer
Richard Wolson told the inquiry Paul wouldn't need to make notes
about a meeting such as the one with Miller because the justice
department would already have the information they needed.
Always maintaining his innocence, Driskell
spent 12 years in prison for Harder's murder. He was freed in
2003 after former federal justice minister Irwin Cotler declared
a miscarriage of justice had likely occurred.
The inquiry continues Tuesday morning
at the WInnipeg Convention Centre with testimony from Paul's
former partner, retired Sgt. Tom Anderson.
- -----
Zanidean given nearly
$85,000
Crown's payments to star witness
By TAMARA KING, STAFF REPORTER, Winnipeg
Sun, July 27, 2006
Cops and Crown attorneys spent nearly
$85,000 on the star witness whose testimony put James Driskell
behind bars, an inquiry has heard.
A total of $84,973.26 was "paid
by the Crown to (Ray Zanidean) for his benefit," according
to a federal Justice Department document unveiled yesterday at
the ongoing Driskell Inquiry.
'BENEFITS'
The document, prepared by a federal justice
department lawyer in 2004, was scrutinized by lawyer James Lockyer
-- who is representing Driskell at the inquiry -- as he grilled
a retired Winnipeg police officer about the "benefits"
Zanidean received.
The lead investigator on the 1990 murder
of Perry Dean Harder, Staff Sgt. Bill VanderGraaf, disputed Lockyer's
use of the term "benefits" to describe the payments,
pointing out nearly $30,000 was handed to the Mounties for the
cost of RCMP protection.
"I don't think they're benefits,
they're expenses," VanderGraaf said, calling it "common
practice" in the RCMP Witness Protection Program.
Though he had some harsh words about
money spent on Zanidean, Driskell said outside the proceedings
yesterday that he already knew there'd been some "major
payouts," including one to fly Zanidean's dogs halfway across
the country. "Are they going to testify?" Driskell
asked, tongue-in-cheek.
The inquiry heard earlier that Zanidean
received a $20,000 cheque from police and prosecutors to help
Zanidean move his family for safety reasons, rather than going
into the formal Witness Protection Program.
VanderGraaf was the officer tasked with
delivering the cheque. He told the inquiry yesterday he was instructed
to do so in a memo from senior Crown Bruce Miller.
Lockyer said the defence wasn't told
about the lump sum at Driskell's 1991 jury trial or during the
subsequent appeal of his conviction. Lockyer said that information
should have been disclosed to defence lawyers before the appeal.
"Appeals are something I don't pay
much attention to. It's a Justice Department situation,"
said VanderGraaf, adding prosecutors were aware of Winnipeg police's
dealings with the Driskell case.
"So you're saying if the fault lies
anywhere, it's with Manitoba Justice," Lockyer asked VanderGraaf
yesterday.
"I think so," he said.
After outlining the nearly $25,000 paid
to Zanidean before he testified at Driskell's trial, the federal
Justice Department document released yesterday goes on to criticize
prosecutors.
"The Crown did not correct the misleading
nature of Zanidean's testimony regarding the consideration he
had received," it states.
At Driskell's trial, Zanidean told the
court he was only getting room and board from "the government."
That assistance was supposed to end that very day, unless he
was needed at the trial the next day, courtroom transcripts filed
for the Driskell Inquiry show.
Payments for Zanidean continued after
the June 1991 trial.
- -----
Inquiry bombshell
Talk of burying Harder revealed to Mountie
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
27, 2006
The estranged wife of cop informant Ray
Zanidean dropped a bombshell when she met with police at her
B.C. home last week, Sun Media has learned.
Susan Zanidean told RCMP her husband
claimed he stood guard while two other men buried the body of
Perry Dean Harder in 1990.
"(She) advised that her husband
and (two other men) sat at her table and talked about what to
do with Perry and burying Perry's body in the garage and putting
cement over the body and he'd never be found," RCMP Cpl.
Dale Morgan wrote in a police report obtained by Sun Media.
"She begged Ray not to hang around
with (name withheld by the Sun) anymore. Ray said he had one
more job to do with him and all he had to do was to go out to
this area, and that is the area where the body was found, and
keep six, and that's all (he had) to do."
Keeping six is a street term for keeping
watch.
Susan Zanidean was never questioned by
police regarding the Harder murder, which James Driskell was
convicted of in June 1991. Her husband's testimony was key in
putting Driskell behind bars.
RCMP interviewed Susan Zanidean last
week following a complaint of domestic abuse against Ray Zanidean.
ALWAYS MAINTAINED HIS INNOCENCE
Driskell -- who has always maintained
his innocence -- served 12 years at Stony Mountain Penitentiary
before former Justice Minister Irwin Cotler declared in 2003
that a miscarriage of justice had likely occurred.
Driskell is now free, though he has never
been exonerated. A judicial inquiry into his conviction and the
conduct of cops and Crown attorneys is ongoing and is scheduled
to wrap up in the fall.
According to the police report, Susan
Zanidean feared for her safety when she married her estranged
husband in 1990, the year Harder was killed.
"Ray was involved in the Perry Harder
murder case in Winnipeg. (He) conned me into marrying him so
I would have witness protection," Susan Zanidean told Cpl.
Morgan on July 20.
"Ray is suspected of perjury in
the murder trial, so the media comes down. Our reputation is
totally destroyed. I had a nervous breakdown. This was the first
time I had ever told anybody about the haunting last job Ray
had done."
-----
'No deals' for snitch,
says former city cop
TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July 28,
2006
An ex-city cop told an inquiry he didn't
make any promises to a star witness about being cleared of arson
charges.
Former Winnipeg police Sgt. Tom Anderson
came under intense scrutiny yesterday at the ongoing inquiry
into James Driskell's 1991 conviction for the murder of Perry
Harder -- a crime Driskell maintains he didn't commit.
There have been allegations police informant
Ray Zanidean was granted immunity from torching a Swift Current,
Sask., home so he'd provide testimony at Driskell's 1991 trial.
Anderson was one of Zanidean's handlers.
Commission counsel Michael Code questioned
a signed police statement Anderson wrote that stated "We
are not aware of any stayed charges or any other deals made with
any witnesses in exchange for testimony."
The note -- dated May 18, 1991 -- was
forwarded to lawyers for use in the case against Driskell. With
discussions about a no-charge deal with Zanidean going on months
before the statement, Code questioned the document's fairness
and accuracy.
"First of all, no deals were made
for Ray Zanidean about anything," said Anderson, who told
police in Swift Current about Zanidean's involvement in the fire.
'IN EXCHANGE FOR NOTHING'
"I don't see anything untrue about
that statement to this day. Ray Zanidean's testimony was in exchange
for nothing. No immunity or anything else."
Grilled on why he didn't mention the
Saskatchewan arson in most of his police reports, Anderson testified
it was because he was working on a Winnipeg homicide case, not
a serious fire in another jurisdiction.
Insp. Ross Burton, an RCMP officer in
Saskatchewan, made a report in July 1991 claiming Anderson said
part of the deal for Zanidean's testimony was that he wouldn't
be charged for the arson.
Code said David Kovnats, the former lawyer
for Zanidean, has been called to testify when the inquiry resumes
on Monday.
- -------
Sun story rocks boat
Revelations leave inquiry reeling
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
28, 2006
James Driskell's lawyer is demanding
answers after an exclusive Sun Media story detailing new claims
from the estranged wife of a police informant whose testimony
helped put his client behind bars for a murder he says he didn't
commit.
"I think I need some information
from you," James Lockyer said to a Sun reporter when approached
yesterday about the claims.
As the Sun reported yesterday, Susan
Zanidean recently told Mounties her husband claimed he stood
guard while two other men buried the body of Perry Dean Harder
in 1990.
"(She) advised that her husband
and (two other men) sat at her table and talked about what to
do with Perry and burying Perry's body in the garage and putting
cement over the body and he'd never be found," RCMP Cpl.
Dale Morgan wrote in a police report obtained by Sun Media.
Ray Zanidean was a star Crown witness
at Driskell's original trial in June 1991. His involvement in
the case has become the subject of much scrutiny, partially because
he was never charged for torching his sister's Swift Current
home even though he made a confession to police.
NEVER EXONERATED
Susan Zanidean was never interviewed
by police for the Harder murder. Her claims came to light after
lodging a domestic-related complaint with B.C. RCMP.
Cops and lawyers were largely tight-lipped
after the story appeared in the Sun yesterday.
Most seemed uncertain whether the woman's
claims would affect the ongoing judicial inquiry into Driskell's
1991 conviction. He served 12 years of a life sentence for Harder's
1990 murder before then-federal justice minister Irwin Cotler
overturned his conviction in 2003.
Driskell, who's always maintained his
innocence, is now free -- though he has never been exonerated.
Michael Code, the inquiry's top lawyer,
wasn't firm on what affect the claims could have on the inquiry.
One of the inquiry's main goals is to examine the conduct of
cops and Crown attorneys, not to assign blame in the Harder homicide.
"I hope not. We'll have to see.
You'll have to remember, our inquiry is retrospective,"
Code told the Sun during a break in yesterday's proceedings.
An RCMP lawyer, David Gates, seemed uncertain
how a possible investigation into Zanidean's claims could affect
the inquiry.
City of Winnipeg lawyers Kim Carswell
and Richard Wolson, who are representing past and present Winnipeg
police officers at the inquiry, declined comment.
Outside the inquiry, Driskell wouldn't
say much about Susan Zanidean's claims.
"It's a little too early, just wanting
to see what happens," he said.
--------
- Lawyer given no arson
info
Police denied having it
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
26, 2006
James Driskell's original lawyer apparently
didn't get the goods from cops and Crown attorneys about an arson
committed by the man whose testimony helped put Driskell away.
While defending Driskell in the 1990
murder of Perry Harder, Greg Brodsky tried to find out what Winnipeg
police knew about an arson in Swift Current, Sask.
REQUESTED INFORMATION
Documents filed at the ongoing Driskell
Inquiry yesterday show that in an April 25, 1991, letter, Brodsky
asked prosecutors to disclose information about three fires,
including the 1990 arson in Swift Current that had ties to Driskell's
case through one of the Crown's star witnesses. Though Winnipeg
police had some details surrounding the case -- which was handled
by the RCMP -- a letter to Brodsky from the Crown says they didn't.
"Winnipeg police have nothing on
these incidents," says a letter from Crown prosecutor Gregg
Lawlor dated April 29, 1991.
"In any event, we know you've got
something on the Swift Current arson ... Lawlor's letter doesn't
reflect that," Driskell Inquiry lawyer Michael Code asked
now-retired Winnipeg police Staff Sgt. Bill VanderGraaf yesterday.
"I can't explain that, sir,"
VanderGraaf replied.
The lead investigator on Harder's murder,
VanderGraaf also couldn't explain why a major development --
word that Swift Current Mounties were "backing off"
on their pursuit of key Driskell witness Ray Zanidean until after
Driskell's trial -- wasn't documented by Winnipeg officers.
VanderGraaf said he happened to be standing
beside the cop liaising with Swift Current Mounties as Winnipeg
Sgt. Tom Anderson told them about Zanidean's involvement with
the fire.
VanderGraaf testified yesterday Anderson
didn't mention the RCMP's supposed offer not to go after Zanidean
in his notebook, which included other details about the October
1990 call.
Notebooks from a then-RCMP constable
who spoke with Anderson, Ross Burton, hadn't been turned over
to the inquiry by last week. But one of the Mountie reports submitted
as evidence mentions the October 1990 call.
Unlike Anderson's notebook, which reportedly
contains immediate entries, Burton's report was written well
over a year after his original conversation with Anderson.
Zanidean's testimony was a key part of
Driskell's 1991 conviction for a murder he's always insisted
he didn't commit.
While speaking to Winnipeg police about
the Harder slaying, Zanidean confessed he and Driskell torched
a Swift Current home owned by his sister.
City cops passed the tip along to Mounties
in the small Saskatchewan community, who earlier testified the
fire was viewed as a "serious crime" in Swift Current.
No charges were ever laid.
---
Potential suspect
paid
Zanidean got gov't $$ at same time, probe told
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
25, 2006
A star Crown witness who helped put James
Driskell behind bars received thousands of dollars from justice
officials even though he was being eyed as a potential suspect
in the very murder about which he'd testified, documents from
the Driskell Inquiry show.
Ray Zanidean received approximately $20,000
from Manitoba Justice for his involvement in Driskell's June
1991 trial for the murder of Perry Harder. Almost two years later,
cops may have been looking at him as one of the suspects in the
slaying, according to comments attributed to Winnipeg police
Chief Jack Ewatski, then an inspector with the department.
"Insp. Ewatski stated that they
had some very pointed questions to ask Zanidean at (sic) it appeared
he knew more about the murder, etc., than what he had advised
police. In fact, there was a possibility that Zanidean was involved
in the murder itself," states a handwritten note from RCMP
Cpl. Tom Orr dated May 5, 1993.
The now-retired Orr was the co-ordinator
for the RCMP's Witness Protection Program around the time of
the 1991 trial and testified yesterday at the ongoing inquiry
into Driskell's conviction.
As with Zanidean, cops and Crowns had
a difficult time dealing with John Gumieny, another witness whose
testimony helped put Driskell in jail for a murder he insists
he didn't commit. Police had concerns about Gumieny's safety
from the start, which is why efforts were made around the time
of the trial to offer protection.
Driskell held Gumieny "in high esteem
as a trusted friend and when he discovers that Mr. Gumieny has
given evidence against him, Mr. Gumieny's life will be in grave
danger. Police have gathered intelligence that Driskell has a
small army of dedicated followers who will not hesitate to carry
out any of his orders," states a Winnipeg police document
submitted as inquiry evidence.
CONTINUED TO SEEK PAYBACK
Close to two years later, Gumieny continued
to seek payback for his involvement in Driskell's trial, including
a move from Ottawa in May 1993. Although the details of why he
needed to relocate were sketchy, there were suggestions it may
have been linked to his work as an informant in drug investigations,
documents show.
"Depending on what side you are
talking to, his reasons for the move range from the recent release
of his name in the Winnipeg papers, or his recent activity as
a source in "A" division," states the May 28,
1993 fax, sent from then-Cpl. Tom Orr to RCMP headquarters in
Ottawa.
Gumieny received $2,874.29 for the rental
of a white Ford truck on May 28, 1993, to move his family, a
pair of inquiry documents show. Another document confirms a payment
of $16,901.52.
In total, it's believed Gumieny received
"at least $21,500" from police, said lawyer James Lockyer,
who represents Driskell.
"I say at least, sir, since his
RCMP file has been lost," Lockyer said while questioning
Orr, who quickly corrected Lockyer, noting the file was "destroyed."
Retired city cop Staff Sgt. Bill VanderGraaf
will likely take the stand today, commission lawyer Michael Code
told the Sun yesterday.
- ---------
A difficult witness
Zanidean kept demanding: ex-cop
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
21, 2006
It's another sticky point in the James
Driskell saga -- a star witness acting like, well, a fussy star
with a laundry list of demands.
Ray Zanidean, whose testimony helped
convict James Driskell of the 1990 murder of Perry Harder, was
a difficult witness with unreasonable expectations, the ongoing
Driskell Inquiry was told yesterday.
"Every time he got something from
city police, he wanted more. He wanted it done his way,"
said retired RCMP Sgt. Tom Orr.
A corporal based in Winnipeg at the time
of Driskell's 1991 trial, Orr was in charge of the Source/Witness
Protection Program, which Winnipeg police would use for informants
and witnesses.
Orr was responsible for handling Zanidean's
application into formal witness protection, a process seemingly
littered with confusion on the part of both police forces.
"(Zanidean's lawyer) was under the
impression ... that the RCMP was going to act as financial benefactor,
real estate agent, used car salesperson, etc.," states Orr's
handwritten note, dated March 25, 1991.
Among Zanidean's 15 requests was one
asking Crown attorneys to sell his 1983 Chevette because he was
worried it would be recognized.
"This has become a priority,"
states a December 1990 letter to the Crown's office from David
Kovnats, Zanidean's lawyer. Zanidean also demanded employment
"equal" to a gig he'd reportedly been as a brakeman
with the CPR.
In addition to a new identity, Zanidean
requested immunity from criminal charges -- a controversial point
that's been the source of much confusion and speculation since
the 1990s.
While Winnipeg police were sorting out
his testimony against Driskell, Mounties were eyeing Zanidean
for charges of torching a home owned by his sister in Swift Current,
Sask.
PAID THE MORTGAGE
Early in Zanidean's agreement to testify
against Driskell, he received $700, plus utilities, for the rental
of a "safe house" while the Justice Department paid
the mortgage on his home.
After Zanidean reportedly received a
death threat -- in the form of a note on his car's windshield
-- that sum was bumped up to $2,000 for a Calgary hotel room,
plus a daily meal allowance of $50.
At one point, officials even signed off
on a $436.28 hotel bill that included "a few trips to the
mini-bar," documents show.
Eventually, Zanidean received a $20,000
"re-location" payment, the inquiry was told.
Zanidean was never admitted to the formal
Source/Witness Protection Program.
- ------
Worried after trial:
ex-cop
About coverup suspicions
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July
20, 2006
A top Mountie was worried about the appearance
of a "coverup" mere weeks after James Driskell's 1991
murder trial, an inquiry heard.
Less than a month after Driskell was
convicted for the murder he's always insisted he didn't commit,
now-retired Staff Sgt. Ron Ferguson sent a memo to RCMP superiors
outlining concerns about the potential perception of concealed
evidence, an inquiry into Driskell's conviction heard yesterday.
In his report, Ferguson states Driskell
and his lawyer, Greg Brodsky certainly knew that information
and evidence Driskell could provide would result in a conviction
against Ray Zanidean.
"Failure to act accordingly could
place our force in a tenuous position as our investigation and
charges would assist their appeal on the murder conviction,"
the report states. "Failure to respond judicially could
be construed as an attempt at concealing evidence similar to
the Donald Marshall case."
Donald Marshall of Nova Scotia served
11 years for a 1971 murder he did not commit.
An officer for over 30 years around the
time of Driskell's trial, Ferguson served as Swift Current's
police chief. His department had a stake in Driskell's trial,
in which he was convicted of killing Perry Harder.
Testimony from Zanidean -- whom police
suspected of torching his sister's Swift Current home -- helped
put Driskell behind bars.
Ferguson, posted in Swift Current in
the early '90s, confirmed the report's contents as he took the
stand yesterday. Ferguson is the second witness to be called
since the Driskell Inquiry started Monday.
"This afforded me some concern,"
Ferguson told inquiry lawyer Michael Code.
There have been conflicting rumours and
speculation for years about whether Zanidean was given immunity
from the Swift Current arson charges to testify against Driskell
in Harder's killing.
Winnipeg police documents indicate a
Swift Current constable offered to hold off charging Zanidean,
while RCMP documents claim city cops repeatedly asked them not
to pursue Zanidean.
RCMP insist they would have charged Zanidean
with the arson if he wasn't part of the formal witness protection
program -- a fact that was apparently a source of "a lot
of confusion" even to the RCMP, Ferguson said. The RCMP
administer the program.
UPSET
Though police believe as many as three
people plotted to torch the Swift Current residence -- including
Zanidean and Driskell -- RCMP never laid any charges. "I
was a little upset that charges were never laid against Ray Zanidean,"
Ferguson said yesterday. "He appeared to be walking away."
Yesterday, lawyers at the inquiry received
an internal RCMP document -- a 3/4-inch thick file containing
newspaper clippings and e-mails -- created by Insp. Ross Burton
in 2003, which he mentioned publicly for the first time near
the end of his first day of testimony. An apology from a lawyer
representing the RCMP accompanied the report.
The documents were not entered as evidence
and weren't made available to the public.
- ------
Officer's memory
disputed
Did talk to Mountie: log
By TAMARA KING, Winnipeg Sun, July 19,
2006
A Mountie claiming a Winnipeg cop was
"deceitful and dishonest" in dealings with the RCMP
during the James Driskell murder case says he can't recall ever
talking to a fellow RCMP member -- in spite of records to the
contrary.
Insp. Ross Burton faced intense questioning
from Winnipeg police lawyers in a second day on the stand at
the ongoing inquiry into Driskell's conviction as conflicting
stories surfaced about a supposed immunity deal for star witness
Ray Zanidean. His testimony helped put Driskell behind bars for
the murder of Perry Harder.
Quizzed by Winnipeg police union lawyer
Richard Wolson, Burton said he had "no recollection or record"
of ever speaking with RCMP Cpl. Tom Orr, who was in charge of
a witness protection program in the early '90s.
'YOU MADE A MISTAKE'
What appears to be a handwritten log
of telephone calls compiled by Orr includes an entry from May
30, 1991. According to the RCMP file, which was tabled as evidence
at the inquiry, Burton called at 11 a.m. to "advise that
there would be no proceedings against Zanidean either as a witness
or accused if he is accepted into the program."
"I'm going to suggest you made a
mistake ... (granting) de-facto immunity," Wolson said to
Burton.
"I'm not going to respond to it,"
Burton replied. "It's a theory, not a question."
While arranging to testify against Driskell
before his 1991 murder trial, Zanidean confessed to Winnipeg
police about his role in a 1990 arson in Swift Current, Sask.
Burton insists city cops pushed for a deal to secure Zanidean's
testimony, while a report from Winnipeg Sgt. Tom Anderson says
Burton offered not to charge Zanidean.
Meantime, comments attributed to RCMP
Staff Sgt. Ron Ferguson indicate Burton had a "tendency
to perhaps be overly suspicious," according to a report
prepared by Driskell inquiry lawyers.
Comments attributed to Ferguson go on
to note that suspicion "is a common trait in police officers,"
and indicate Burton seemed "very serious, intelligent and
well-educated" while under his command as a constable in
Swift Current.
The document is a summary of an interview
with Ferguson conducted last May and not a formal transcript.
Driskell has maintained his innocence
since his 1991 conviction, which was overturned in March 2005
when former federal justice minister Irwin Cotler said "a
miscarriage of justice likely occurred," ordering a new
trial.
The same day, Manitoba Justice stayed
all charges. Although then-deputy attorney general Bruce MacFarlane
said he wouldn't be re-tried, Driskell has never been exonerated
for the crime.
------
Inquiry into wrongful
conviction of James Driskell starts in Winnipeg
Canadian Press, July 17, 2006
WINNIPEG (CP) - The inquiry into the
wrongful murder conviction of James Driskell is underway in Winnipeg.
The inquiry is focusing on the key witness
in Driskell's trial, Ray Zanidean.
Zanidean was a suspect in a 1990 house
fire in Swift Current, Sask.
An RCMP officer told an inquiry Monday
that Winnipeg police asked him not to go after Zanidean for the
arson because they wanted him to testify against Driskell.
Zanidean was never charged.
Driskell was convicted in 1991 of killing
Perry Harder, and the federal government quashed the conviction
last year.
© The Canadian Press 2006
Accusing Mountie
faces heat
Did he act to 'cover tracks' in Driskell case? z Hostility grows
between police agencies
By Leah Janzen, Winnipeg Free Press,
Jul 19 2006
AN RCMP officer who says Winnipeg police
used "deceitful and dishonest" conduct in pursuing
James Driskell was himself accused yesterday of "covering
his tracks" in the same case.
Insp. Ross Burton, testifying for the second day at the judicial
inquiry into Driskell's wrongful murder conviction, underwent
a daylong cross-examination over his claim that Winnipeg police
offered an arson suspect an unauthorized immunity deal in exchange
for testimony against Driskell.
Richard Wolson, a lawyer for the Winnipeg
police rank and file, suggested it was Burton, not Winnipeg police
sergeant Tom Anderson, who approved immunity to Ray Zanidean
for a Swift Current arson in exchange for his testimony against
Driskell in the Perry Dean Harder murder case.
Burton had added new fuel to smouldering hostilities between
the Mounties and the Winnipeg Police Service regarding how each
agency dealt with the Driskell matter, by telling the inquiry
he had a general "distrust" of the city police officers
and of Anderson in particular.
He characterized Anderson as a "fast
talker" who ignored RCMP protocol and offered immunity to
Zanidean.
In written documents that have been accepted
as evidence, Anderson said it was Burton who offered to drop
the investigation of Zanidean.
The inquiry also heard that crucial RCMP
memos regarding the case are missing.
One of Burton's fellow officers, RCMP
Cpl. Tom Orr, also documented in a May 30, 1991 memo, which has
been accepted into evidence, that it was Burton who OK'd the
deal.
"Call received from (Burton) who
advised that there would be no proceedings against Zanidean,
either as a witness or accused if he is accepted into the (witness
protection) program," Orr wrote.
Burton said he has no recollection of ever speaking to Orr and
suggested his colleague was wrong.
"I was made aware that (Orr) was
claiming he spoke with me," he testified. "I was of
the opinion that Manitoba RCMP may want to look at this. I felt
(Orr) could be portrayed (at the inquiry) in a poor light."
Wolson countered that perhaps it would
be Burton who would be portrayed poorly and noted a week after
Orr's note there is a memo written by Burton saying he doesn't
agree with offering immunity to Zanidean.
"I suggest you did tell (Orr) what
he says you did. That you made a mistake telling (Orr) you were
granting de facto immunity and what you're now doing is covering
your tracks," said Wolson.
"That's your theory. I'm not going
to respond," Burton responded.
Driskell's lawyer Greg Brodsky, who could
have used the information to discredit Zanidean when he testified
against Driskell, was never told about the immunity discussions.
No one was ever charged in connection to the Swift Current arson
case.
Earlier in the day, Burton admitted that
crucial RCMP memos are missing from the information being presented
at the inquiry.
Burton said any notes he made regarding
telephone conversations he had with Anderson in 1990 have been
purged from the files.
Wolson asked: "You get a call from
(Anderson) and he tells you they know that Zanidean is responsible
for the arson. This is the first time you have someone admitting
to the offence. You'd expect that you'd make a (file notation)
wouldn't you?" asked Wolson.
Burton replied: "I generated (an
internal) memo, which is missing."
In fact, during a six-week period during
the arson investigation that included the first phone call Burton
had with Anderson, there is no notation on the arson file whatsoever.
After becoming aware that Winnipeg police
were reinvestigating the Harder murder in 1993, Burton testified
he told senior RCMP officers that all the files related to the
Zanidean arson case should be retained in case of an inquiry.
"I told them not to destroy the
files and I took a plain piece of paper and wrote, 'do not destroy'
and put it around each volume with elastics. That's all I could
do," he said. Yet, while most of the file remains intact,
the notes relating to two phone calls between Burton and Anderson
are gone.
Burton said he remained suspicious of the Winnipeg police in
1993 when Insp. Bob Hall and then-inspector Jack Ewatski came
to Saskatchewan as part of a reinvestigation of the Harder murder.
The two officers arrived outside of the
agreed time, when Burton's boss would not be available. He did
not want to sit down with them alone.
"There were several reasons. At
that point my dealings with the Winnipeg police left me with
distrust," he said. "They showed up unexpectedly in
the evening, which had not been arranged. I found that quite
odd."
Burton believed that Winnipeg police
and Brodsky were working to sabotage his arson investigation.
In his statement to the commission counsel,
Burton's own former boss, RCMP officer Ron Ferguson referred
to Burton as having a "tendency to be overly suspicious."
Driskell spent 12 years behind bars for
Harder's murder. He has always maintained his innocence.
Four years ago, Driskell's conviction was quashed by the federal
Justice Department after DNA tests proved hairs used to convict
him were not his.
The inquiry continues today. leah.janzen@freepress.mb.ca
Ex-officer worried
over perception of cover-up
By David Kuxhaus, Winnipeg Free
Press, July 20, 2006
A former senior RCMP officer expressed
concerns that James Driskell could be wrongfully convicted less
than a month after he was found guilty in 1991 of the murder
of Perry Dean Harder.
Ron Ferguson, a former staff sergeant at the RCMP's Swift Current
detachment, told an inquiry yesterday that he was concerned that
people would think the RCMP might be involved in a "cover-up".
Ferguson wrote a memo to his superiors
advising them a key witness in the Driskell case, Ray Zanidean,
had committed perjury during the trial when he testified about
an arson being investigated by Swift Current RCMP.
Zanidean and his sister were suspects
in the arson and Ferguson noted in his memo that it put police
in a "tenuous" position.
He wrote that if charges were laid against
the two in connection with the arson, it would come out that
Zanidean had perjured himself during the Driskell trial.
"The ramifications of the evidence
'tainted' by a perjured witness will certainly affect the murder
conviction against Driskell," wrote Ferguson.
"Winnipeg Police Services are certainly
concerned with the possibility of a convicted murderer walking
for the sake of an arson charge."
But Ferguson said failing to disclose
the information to Manitoba Justice officials could have serious
repercussions for the RCMP.
"Failure to respond judicially could
be construed as an attempt at concealing evidence similar to
the Donald Marshall case," wrote Ferguson.
Marshall was convicted of murder in 1971
and spent 11 years in prison before he was exonerated and set
free.
An inquiry determined that witnesses
had lied at his trial and that key evidence was withheld by investigators.
Driskell served 12 years in prison for
the murder of Harder.
He has always proclaimed his innocence.
Four years ago, new DNA evidence proved
hairs used to convict Driskell had not come from him.
Ferguson told the inquiry yesterday that
it wasn't his place to contact Manitoba Justice about his concerns.
Instead, he noted in his memo that there
will need to be "considerable liaison" between Saskatchewan
and Manitoba Justice on the matter.
Saskatchewan Justice did raise concerns
with the head of prosecutions in Manitoba about six months after
Ferguson's memo.
Ferguson is the second witness to testify
at the inquiry, which has featured much finger-pointing between
the RCMP and Winnipeg police.
Much of it has centred on what kind of
offers, and by whom, were made to Zanidean in return for his
testimony against Driskell.
RCMP have accused the Winnipeg police
of offering Zanidean an unauthorized immunity deal for his evidence.
Winnipeg police have countered that it
was RCMP who offered to drop the investigation against Zanidean.
Ferguson testified yesterday that that
was never the case.
"I was very anxious to have charges laid against any and
all involved in this crime," said Ferguson. The inquiry
continues.
david.kuxhaus@freepress.mb.ca
Key witness wasn't part of witness
protection program
An RCMP officer told an inquiry into
the wrongful conviction of James Driskell that a key witness
in the murder trial was never part of the witness protection
program.
Sgt. Thomas Orr said there were discussions
between him and Winnipeg police about admitting Ray Zanidean
into the program but a formal application was never made.
Driskell spent 12 years in prison after
being found guilty in 1991 of killing Perry Dean Harder.
There have been different versions by
RCMP and Winnipeg police as to who promised what to Zanidean. (Winnipeg Free Press Breaking News,
undated)
Ontario judge
to oversee James Driskell inquiry
Canadian Press, December 15, 2005
WINNIPEG - A prominent Ontario judge
who presided over the trial of serial killer Paul Bernardo will
oversee the inquiry into the wrongful conviction of James Driskell.
Patrick LeSage, a former chief justice
of the Ontario Superior Court, is to review new evidence that
led to Driskell's murder conviction being quashed earlier this
year. "The case is now in the hands of a completely independent
and exceptionally competent reviewer of fact," Manitoba
Attorney General Gord Mackintosh said in a release Thursday.
"I am confident the inquiry will
provide us with more information about what more could or should
have been done in the case."
Driskell was convicted in 1991 of murdering
his friend, Perry Dean Harder. He was released in November 2003
on bail, largely on the strength of new evidence that was withheld
from his lawyers.
After 13 years of pleading his innocence,
Driskell's conviction was quashed in March by federal Justice
Minister Irwin Cotler, who determined Driskell was wrongly convicted
of Harder's murder.
Manitoba then called for a judicial inquiry.
LeSage will be assisted at the inquiry
by Ontario defence attorney Michael Code, who has been appointed
commission counsel. Code is a high-profile lawyer who recently
won an acquittal for one of the accused in the Air India bombing
case in Vancouver.
He also served as assistant deputy minister
of justice in Ontario, and as part of his duties oversaw the
lengthy Bernardo prosecution and the infamous plea bargain of
Bernardo's wife and co-accused, Karla Homolka.
The inquiry will include public hearings
and is to begin next year. Dates have not yet been set.
--
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell