|
previous
| injusticebusters daily reports
- Sept-Oct 2003:
The Klassen/Kvello civil action
- A self-represented
litigant's major accomplishment
Prosecutors,
therapist not responsible for charges: lawyer
Jason Warick, Saskatchewan
News Network, November 14, 2003
A therapist and two prosecutors
named in a $10-million malicious prosecution lawsuit bear no
responsibility for the dozens of sexual assault charges laid
against 12 people in 1991, their lawyer said in his final arguments
Thursday.
Donald McKillop appeared to
distance his clients -- therapist Carol Bunko-Ruys and Crown
prosecutors Matthew Miazga and Sonja Hansen -- from Saskatoon
police officer Brian Dueck, the fourth person named in the lawsuit.
Dueck is represented by Regina lawyer David Gerrand.
However, McKillop denied trying
to absolve his clients of responsibility.
He said they will each "stand
to answer for their respective roles."
But that doesn't mean his clients
are responsible for the charges that were laid, he said.
Bunko-Ruys, who was contracted
by the Department of Social Services for the case, had no power
to lay or recommend charges, McKillop noted.
Miazga simply acted as a "legal
adviser" to Dueck, then a corporal, when Dueck brought him
the case file, McKillop said.
"He was neither investigating
nor was he directing (now) Supt. Dueck's investigation,"
he said. "He operated in his proper realm."
And Hansen wasn't even involved
in the case until after the charges were laid in July of 1991.
"Ms. Hansen had no role
(in the investigation and charges), and Mr. Miazga's role was
beyond criticism."
Final arguments have now concluded
in the trial, which began Sept. 8 and had more than 30 witnesses
appear.
Justice George Baynton, who
will now start sifting through the thousands of pages of documents
and transcripts filed during the lawsuit, said he hopes to give
his ruling before Christmas.
The suit was filed by the Klassen
family and four other extended family members who cannot be named.
Those who can be named include
the now-deceased family matriarch Marie Klassen, son Richard
and his wife Kari Klassen, son John and his wife Myrna, son Dale
and his wife Anita, and daughter Pam Klassen.
The 12 are suing as a result
of their 1991 arrests for sexually assaulting foster children
Michael, Michelle and Kathy Ross.
The Ross children lived with
Dale and Anita Klassen.
McKillop's arguments are in
direct opposition to self-represented Richard Klassen, who told
court during his closing argument Wednesday, "the blame
should fall on the prosecutorial team" of Miazga, Hansen,
Dueck and Bunko-Ruys.
The Klassen family and others
were charged and committed for trial, but Klassen's father, Peter,
pleaded guilty to four counts of sexual assault in exchange for
a stay of proceedings against the others. He served four years
in jail.
The Ross children have since
recanted, admitting they made up the tales of abuse.
In the lawsuit, the people
charged allege that Miazga, Hansen, Bunko-Ruys, and Dueck knew
the children were lying and that their disclosures were inconsistent.
They alleged in closing arguments Wednesday that the case against
them continued so the officials could "save face."
McKillop said it wasn't any
of his clients or Dueck that made up the stories of abuse. It
was the children.
"The children made up
those stories and the children maintained them," he said.
"None of the defendants
did."
McKillop said each defendant
played a different role in the case and "that seperateness
must be taken into account."
He told Baynton that mistakes
or even gross negligence are not enough to find people guilty
of malice.
"It requires a dishonesty,
an attempt to commit a fraud on the court system," McKillop
said.
"That's just absent here."
Also Thursday, there were brief
submissions in the countersuit launched by Miazga and Hansen.
They allege Richard Klassen
damaged their reputations with his public campaign of postering
and demonstrations in the years leading up to the lawsuit trial.
Klassen said he felt the public
campaign was justified because the information was true and in
the public interest.
McKillop said Klassen made
statements as if they were fact, and the judge must decide whether
they are indeed facts or simply opinions.
In an interview outside court
Thursday afternoon, Klassen said he's happy with the case they
presented.
"I remain confident. I
now put my faith in the justice system," he said.
© Copyright 2003 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
Sex case pursued
'to save face,' court hears
Jason Warick, Saskatchewan
News Network, Thursday, November 13, 2003
Two prosecutors, a police officer
and a therapist pushed ahead with a failing sexual assault case
against more than a dozen people in the early 1990s simply "to
save face," court heard Wednesday from the lawyer representing
most of the accused.
But the lawyer representing
Brian Dueck in the malicious prosecution lawsuit now before the
courts said Dueck was simply doing his job. At worst, Dueck,
then a corporal with the Saskatoon Police Service and now a superintendent,
was mistaken or negligent at times but not malicious, his lawyer
argued.
The lawyer for prosecutors
Matthew Miazga and Sonja Hansen and therapist Carol Bunko-Ruys
is scheduled to present his final arguments today.
In July of 1991, the 12 people
now suing and several others were charged with sexually abusing
foster children Michael, and twin sisters Michelle and Kathy
Ross.
The Ross children had made
up allegations of sexual abuse, as well as detailed accounts
of satanic ritual abuse, which included animal and human sacrifice.
Michael Ross was later discovered to be abusing his sisters.
On the eve of the 1993 trial
looking into the Ross children's abuse, Peter Klassen pleaded
guilty to four sexual assault charges and the charges against
those who are now suing were stayed. Peter Klassen was the father
of several of the accused, including John, Richard and Dale Klassen
who, with his wife Anita, provided foster care for the Ross children.
The 12 people, including self-represented
Richard Klassen, sued for malicious prosecution, and that trial
began Sept. 8 at the Court of Queen's Bench in Saskatoon.
After more than 30 witnesses,
final arguments began Wednesday.
The children's disclosures
were "riddled with inconsistencies," Richard Klassen
said in his closing argument.
Any reasonable investigator,
particularly ones as experienced as these, should have noticed
this and dropped the case, he said.
Dueck asked leading questions
to get the desired answers, Klassen said.
"He was very suggestive.
He did it with the assistance of Carol Bunko-Ruys," he said.
"He knew that the more
he (led), the more that would come."
Klassen and Robert Borden,
who represents the other 11 plaintiffs, noted evidence was withheld
from them.
Miazga, for example, heard
the children disclose more abuse allegations in his office, but
didn't tell the Klassen's defence lawyer about it.
Klassen wondered why Dueck
and Bunko-Ruys didn't question one of the Ross girls further
when she disclosed that she and Michael were up all night "screwing."
Borden argued there was a "conspiracy"
to ignore this information and focus only on the stories that
made the adults look guilty.
"That's the track (Dueck)
was on, and he wasn't going to let the truth or the evidence
get in his way," Borden said.
"Their case was disastrously
weak. It had no merit."
Borden noted the children were
never asked to identify their abusers during the preliminary
hearing. Richard Klassen's tattoos, his wife Kari's pregnancy,
and other distinguishing characteristics could have tested whether
the children saw them naked, as they claimed.
The case ruined the lives of
his clients, and not once have any of the prosecutors or others
expressed concern, he said.
Dueck's lawyer, David Gerrand,
said the judge must be careful not to apply current mindsets
and attitudes to a case that occurred 12 years ago.
"What may appear illogical
or unreasonable now should not be seen as illogical or unreasonable
at the time the matters occurred," Gerrand said.
He said child abuse investigations
are complex at the best of times. He noted the testimony of one
other officer who said laying charges were often a subjective
judgment call of the police officer.
The recantations of the children
-- who admitted during this lawsuit that they lied about the
abuse -- were not available to Dueck at the time of the charges,
Gerrand noted.
He admitted Dueck did lead
the children during some interviews, but argued it was necessary
to help them focus.
Gerrand cited the protocol
in place at the time which stated children were to be believed
when disclosing abuse. The laws had also changed at the time,
decreasing the need for corroborating evidence in child abuse
cases.
"These complaints were
to be taken seriously," he said.
The case was also given to
Dueck, Gerrand noted.
"It was not a case (Dueck)
sought out or chose to champion or advance," he said. "These
allegations were not the creation of superintendent Dueck."
As for prosecutor Terry Hinz,
who rejected the case when Dueck brought it to him first, Gerrand
said Hinz had "many opportunities" to raise his concerns
with Miazga and Hansen.
Gerrand encouraged Justice
George Baynton to consider the fact Hinz took those concerns
instead to the people suing his own co-workers.
Also Wednesday morning, former
CBC reporter Amy Jo Ehman testified as a "rebuttal witness."
Ehman was the final witness in the case.
Ehman had read and heard media
reports on the lawsuit in recent days, including Dueck's assertion
he didn't pursue the satanic ritual abuse allegations, only the
sexual abuse ones.
Ehman said she called plaintiff
lawyer Borden, and offered a different perspective.
Dueck and Ehman met at an event
in the early-1990s, and Dueck told her he was working on an important
case.
Dueck recommended she read
a book about an American day care where the children made allegations
of satanic ritual abuse against the adults.
"I remembered being really
horrified" by the allegations in the book, she testified.
Despite assertions in the lawsuit
that it was not about satanic abuse, "I had been told (by
Dueck) that's what it was about," she testified.
© Copyright 2003 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
Shauna Rempel's November
7 stories were not posted online.
Witness recalls
she believed children's story
Shauna Rempel, Saskatchewan
News Network; Canwest News Service, November 06, 2003
SASKATOON -- Crown prosecutor
Sonja Hansen still believed in the "gist" of the Ross
children's sexual abuse allegations, even though she testified
she had no confidence in several of the other child accusers.
Hansen told court on Wednesday
she still believed in the "gist" of the allegations
of sexual abuse that siblings Michael, Kathy and Michelle Ross
were making against their foster parents Dale and Anita Klassen
and members of the extended Klassen family.
She believed this despite testifying
Wednesday that she had virtually no involvement with the Ross
children and she was not confident in the testimony of other
children who came forward with stories of abuse at the hands
of their foster families.
Hansen is being sued for malicious
prosecution because of her part in the complex court case based
on allegations of sometimes-bizarre sexual abuse by the Ross
children and six other foster children that led to the 1991 arrests
of their foster families, the Ross's birth parents and others.
Most of the charges were eventually stayed after the Ross children
admitted they made up the allegations.
In fall 1991, Hansen was preparing
six children, who cannot be named, for a court case against the
extended Klassen family. Her colleague Matthew Miazga, who is
also being sued, was working with the Ross children on a sexual
assault court case against the Ross's birth parents. The Ross
children have allowed their names to be used in the media.
Police officer Brian Dueck
and therapist Carol Bunko-Ruys are also being sued for $10 million
in damages in the malicious prosecution lawsuit launched by 12
members of the Klassen family.
On Wednesday Hansen took the
stand and told one of her lawyers, Jerome Tholl, that she had
little contact with Dueck and Bunko-Ruys outside of court and
"virtually none" of her work involved the Ross children.
Instead, she testified that
she focused on discussing allegations of abuse made by six other
foster children. It soon became clear during one-on-one interviews
that some of the children could not be trusted to give reliable
testimony against some of their alleged abusers, she said.
One child told Hansen that
he lied about the abuse because he was mad at his caregiver for
"being mean" by making him eat "hot sauce"
and he wanted to get back at her.
That same child also recanted
some of his allegations of sexual abuse, but Hansen said she
couldn't be sure if that was simply because the boy was nervous.
"I didn't know if his
recantations were genuine," Hansen said. "I don't have
a crystal ball. I'm not God. I don't know when someone's telling
me the truth or not."
Hansen said inconsistencies
in a child's statement did not necessarily mean they were lying.
"Even though children
might not be able to give details to precisely when and where
and time, they do know that something happened to them and who
did it."
However, this went beyond the
usual inconsistencies, she said.
By the time of the Klassens'
preliminary inquiry ended in January, 1992, Hansen only had two
child witnesses who alleged abuse against Richard's sister Pam
and his father Peter. Hansen had recommended that all the other
charges be stayed and she ruled out the other four children as
witnesses.
"I felt I had lost confidence
in them as witnesses and I felt I could not offer them to the
court as witnesses," she said.
The Ross children stayed on
as witnesses and testified against their birth parents in late
1992. Hansen saw some of their time on the stand and told court
on Wednesday that the Ross children had suffered an "almost
inhumane" experience. She said she didn't feel they should
have to go through it again in a trial involving the Klassens.
The Klassen case never made
it to trial. Lawyers reached a plea bargain and the remaining
charges against the Klassens were stayed while patriarch Peter
Klassen pleaded guilty to four counts of sexual assault.
Hansen's testimony on Wednesday
was detailed and she was able to clearly remember 12-year-old
conversations and dates.
She clearly recalled, for example,
that during a conversation with superiors about whether to proceed
with a preliminary inquiry against the Klassen family, it was
Ellen Gunn, the executive director of public prosecutions, asked
her what she thought of the Ross's allegations. Hansen said she
believed in the gist of what the children were saying and Gunn
told her and Miazga to go ahead with the case.
© Copyright 2003 The Leader-Post (Regina)
Prosecutor
did not believe kids' allegations of ritual abuse
Shauna Rempel, The StarPhoenix,
November 05, 2003
Crown prosecutor Matthew Miazga
did not believe the allegations of ritual and sexual abuse made
by three foster children, yet he told court he spent months searching
for an expert to testify.
In the early 1990s, Miazga
led the prosecution of over 70 charges of sometimes bizarre sexual
abuse alleged by siblings Michael, Kathy and Michelle Ross against
their former foster parents, their birth parents and others.
On the stand at Court of Queen's
Bench Tuesday, Miazga testified he sought out people who had
experience working with satanic and ritual abuse of children
to retain as potential expert witnesses, even though he has repeatedly
testified that he did not believe the more bizarre allegations
actually happened.
The children eventually admitted
to making up the allegations, which included stories of killing
and eating babies, being forced to eat their own feces and to
have sex with groups of people. It was actually Michael Ross
who was abusing his sisters at this time. Most of the charges
were stayed.
Now former suspect Richard
Klassen and 11 members of his extended family are suing Miazga,
along with fellow prosecutor Sonja Hansen, therapist Carol Bunko-Ruys
and police officer Brian Dueck, for $10 million in damages at
a malicious prosecution trial.
Robert Borden, who represents
11 of the plaintiffs, accused Miazga in court of having an agenda.
"You were on a course
to demonstrate to the people in Saskatoon, at least, that you
were on a mission that is to fight these Satanists."
Miazga denied the accusation,
calling it "outrageous."
Miazga testified on Tuesday
he had little knowledge about satanic and ritual abuse.
"I didn't know much about
that," he told Borden. "Still don't, to tell you the
truth."
Miazga recalled asking Dueck
and later Bunko-Ruys about those aspects of the case. He told
Borden on Tuesday that he knew Dueck had attended a few seminars
on ritual and sexual abuse.
Bunko-Ruys helped Miazga and
Hansen find an expert on ritual and sexual abuse to testify,
a task that took months, Miazga said.
Dueck's initial and follow-up
police reports mention several experts by name who could provide
more information, or possibly testify in court, as well as what
Borden called a "plethora" of references to abuse of
a satanic and ritualistic nature.
Miazga eventually retained
a Hamilton psychiatrist named Joanna Santa Barbara. She testified
in November 1992 at the trial of the Ross's birth parents and
a family friend that the children likely suffered sexual and
ritual abuse. Santa Barbara told the court in 1992 that the children
seemed to be displaying many symptoms consistent with ritual
abuse, although she added that their abnormal behaviour and unusual
degree of sexual knowledge could be linked to other forms of
trauma.
Borden questioned Miazga about
advice he gave to Dueck, the investigating officer, leading up
to the July arrests of the Klassen family members and the Ross's
birth parents. Miazga and Dueck, who had never worked together
before, spoke a few times in spring 1991, because Dueck said
he wanted advice from a Crown prosecutor before laying the charges.
Miazga advised Dueck that there
were reasonable and probable grounds to lay the charges. However,
he advised Dueck to get search warrants for some of the houses
where the alleged abuse took place and suggested that he talk
to the accused in the hopes of getting them to confess.
In the end, though, it was
up to Dueck, Miazga said.
"If he believed the children,
he should go ahead and lay these charges," Miazga said on
Tuesday.
During his cross-examination,
Borden brought up the topic of exculpatory evidence, which is
evidence that could be seen as helping to clear the Klassen family
of blame.
Miazga said he was aware of
exculpatory evidence, such as that fact that all the accused
denied the allegations.
He also eventually found out
about an incident in which Anita Klassen took an injured Michelle
Ross to the hospital, which he said was not something in keeping
with the behaviour of an abuser.
But he said he only found out
during the lawsuit trial that Dueck had conducted videotaped
interviews with children who denied any abuse happened. Those
children were close to some of the plaintiffs and spent a lot
of time in their home. The videotapes were not brought up until
after the charges were stayed.
Klassen, who is representing
himself, wrapped up his cross-examination of Miazga on Tuesday.
Much of Klassen's cross-examination centred on responses to potential
reporter's questions prepared by the provincial Justice Department's
media relations office. Those responses cited a lack of evidence
as the main reason for staying the charges against the Klassens.
Miazga had testified that the
primary reason for agreeing to stay the charges was because the
Ross children were emotionally unstable and could not handle
spending more time in court. On Tuesday, he said he still felt
that way and that he disagreed with the answers prepared by his
department.
Klassen had several questions
about evidence gathered in his own case. Although most of the
allegations were made by Michael Ross, Miazga testified that
all three Ross children told him during interviews that Richard
Klassen had abused them.
Klassen asked Miazga if he
was aware of any medical evidence linking Klassen to the Ross
children.
Miazga replied that given the
time frame and nature of the allegations and the fact that DNA
testing was not available, there was no medical evidence directly
linking any of the accused with the children.
There was however, evidence
consistent with recent and past sexual abuse, Miazga said.
Hansen is expected to take
the stand today and her testimony should last a couple of days
in total.
© Copyright 2003 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
Prosecutor
answers to Klassen: Miazga testifies he advised cop, but didn't
direct investigation
Shauna Rempel, The StarPhoenix,
, November 04, 2003
Crown prosecutor Matthew Miazga
appeared to distance himself from the decision to lay charges
as he found himself being cross-examined on Monday by a man he
once prosecuted for sexual assault.
Miazga was the lead prosecutor
in a case charging Richard Klassen and his family with sexual
assault in 1991. The allegations turned out to be false, and
Klassen and 11 of his family members are suing Miazga, prosecutor
Sonja Hansen, police officer Brian Dueck and therapist Carol
Bunko-Ruys for malicious prosecution.
Miazga started working on the
case in 1991 after investigating officer Dueck brought it to
the Saskatoon Crown prosecutors office in order to get advice
on charges.
Dueck testified earlier in
the trial that he wanted to know how to proceed in his investigation
into sometimes bizarre allegations of abuse made by siblings
Michael, Kathy and Michelle Ross, who were foster children in
the home of Anita and Dale Klassen. The allegations later included
the couple's extended family, as well as the Ross children's
birth parents.
Klassen, who is representing
himself in the $10-million lawsuit, began cross-examining Miazga
on Monday.
Miazga said he was involved
to give advice to Dueck, appearing to distance himself from Dueck's
decision to lay charges and the manner in which he laid those
charges.
"We do not direct the
course of the investigation," he said, adding that unlike
what might be portrayed on American television shows, prosecutors
in Saskatchewan do not tell police what charges to lay and prosecutors
do not have to approve charges before they are laid.
"Police are able to lay
any charges they see fit," Miazga said.
Miazga was not the first prosecutor
to look at Dueck's investigation into the allegations made by
the Ross children.
Terry Hinz, now retired, testified
that he had seen the same file before it came to Miazga. Hinz
said he had told Dueck there was not enough evidence to proceed
to trial.
But Miazga said on Monday Hinz
had a chance to bring up his concerns to Miazga on at least one
occasion and did not.
Miazga said he didn't note
any major concerns with the evidence Dueck gathered, although
when asked, he said he probably had some questions about an allegation
in the file regarding the sacrifice of a small baby.
"I'm sure I would have
wondered about that sort of thing," Miazga said on Monday.
Miazga testified when he asked
Dueck about other allegations, such as blood letting and ritual
abuse of animals, he did not get the impression that Dueck was
serious about pursuing those allegations.
"It wasn't being suggested
to me that these things necessarily happened. They were things
the kids were saying and I think we were trying to figure out
what to make of it," Miazga said.
Miazga testified that he watched
the videotaped interviews Dueck and Bunko-Ruys made of the Ross
children's allegations. He said he did not note any major concerns
at the time.
Miazga referred to his notes
frequently on Monday because he said he cannot remember details
about events that occurred more than a decade ago.
In the afternoon, Klassen and
Miazga had a heated discussion about an incident when Kathy Ross
made a new allegation during a meeting with Miazga that Kari
Klassen, Richard's wife, had abused her.
There was a charge against
Kari Klassen regarding Kathy Ross, but Dueck testified earlier
in the trial that there was no basis for this charge and that
he had simply made a mistake.
"I had assumed that because
there was a charge against Kari regarding Kathy that there was
some foundation for that charge to be laid," Miazga said.
Miazga was preparing Kathy
Ross for court at the time and no one witnessed the exchange,
although Miazga did make notes about what Kathy Ross said about
the abuse, which included inappropriate touching and fondling.
Richard Klassen asked Miazga
how he could prove what Kathy Ross said.
Miazga became upset at that
and said there was no reason for him to make up the incident.
"I can't imagine what
motivation I would have to write something down that didn't happen,"
said Miazga.
"You either have to believe
me or you don't."
Before Klassen began his cross-examination,
Miazga testified about the incidents leading up to most of the
charges against the extended Klassen family being stayed in 1993.
The Ross children's birth parents
and a friend were convicted in late 1992 of abusing the Ross
children. Several years later, those convictions were overturned
by the Supreme Court of Canada.
Justice Mary Batten, who presided
over the 1992 trial, said in her judgment that she hoped the
three convictions would end the matter because the children had
suffered enough and needed time to heal.
Although Miazga said he felt
the case against the extended Klassen family was much stronger
because Batten appeared to believe the children's allegations,
the judge's comments weighed heavily on his mind, Miazga said.
Therapist Bunko-Ruys also told
him the children were backsliding on any gains they had made
and their foster parents at the time said they were emotionally
fragile, Miazga said.
Miazga said that's why he was
ready to listen when Jay Watson, lawyer for Richard Klassen's
father Peter, called him a short time later and offered a deal
in which Peter Klassen pleaded guilty to four counts of sexual
assault in exchange for stays on the rest of the charges against
the other family members.
After discussion with his superiors
in the Justice Department, Miazga and Hansen agreed to the deal.
Klassen continues his cross-examination
today. Robert Borden, the lawyer for the other 11 plaintiffs,
is also scheduled to question Miazga today.
The case is expected to last
at least until next week.
© Copyright 2003 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
Crown
persisted in sex case despite children's lies: Miazga at Court
of Queen's Bench
Lana
Haight, The StarPhoenix, November 01, 2003
A Crown prosecutor being sued
for malicious prosecution proceeded with the sex abuse case against
Richard Klassen and his extended family even though there were
times the children making the abuse allegations lied to him and
others.
According to the testimony
of Matthew Miazga, one of two prosecutors assigned to the case
in 1991, he met individually with Michael, Michelle and Kathy
Ross several times between October, 1991, and December, 1992,
to discuss their testimony, explain how the court system worked
and emphasize the importance of telling the truth to him, the
police and others.
"There were times that
I knew they weren't telling me the truth about things where I
had independent knowledge of it and we talked about that. I can
remember times I would use firmer language than I might use with
a child because it would concern me that they would say things
-- and this would be about school or their personal life where
I would have independent verification," said Miazga at Court
of Queen's Bench on Friday.
Miazga along with prosecutor
Sonja Hansen, Saskatoon police Supt. Brian Dueck and therapist
Carol Bunko-Ruys are being sued for $10 million by Klassen and
11 members of his family who were charged with sexual assault
stemming from horrific allegations of ritual abuse made up by
the Ross children and others.
Miazga, who explained he wasn't
feeling well, was asked during direct examination by his lawyer
Don McKillop to speak louder because lawyers for the plaintiffs
couldn't hear his testimony, despite microphones and speakers
in the court room. Several times he asked McKillop to repeat
questions. He frequently drank water during his questioning.
And to aid his memory, Miazga brought his diaries and a timeline
that he prepared.
Miazga testified he was concerned
about the credibility of Michael when, in November, 1991 while
testifying at another sex abuse preliminary hearing, the boy
lied about keeping a notebook.
He said Michael's foster parents
and a therapist weren't surprised by the lie and explained he
was trying to appear to imitate the judge and lawyers who were
taking notes.
That led to a telephone conversation
with Miazga, Hansen, and their superiors: Wilf Tucker, the regional
Crown prosecutor; Fred Dehm, who was taking over Tucker's job
while he was on leave; Ellen Gunn, executive director of public
prosecutions; and Richard Quinney, director of prosecutors.
Gunn, now a justice of the
Court of Queen's Bench, testified earlier in the civil trial
that she had no memory of the sex abuse case. Quinney, who is
deceased, was also named in the civil trial, but earlier this
week, Justice George Baynton decided there was no basis for the
case against Quinney.
Miazga said the group decided
to proceed with the preliminary hearings in both that case and
the Klassen case and let the judge decide if the matters should
go to trial.
Miazga said he conferred with
some of his superiors again during the Klassen preliminary hearing
because Michelle was inconsistent during cross-examination, which
lasted several days.
"She was beginning to
agree with everything essentially that was put to her in cross-examination
no matter what it was," said Miazga. "Anytime a witness
is inconsistent I would have concerns about that witness being
found to be a reliable witness by the court, and there's always
the question is this person telling the truth or are these inconsistencies
due to other reasons such as fatigue or the age of the child."
Again, it was decided to continue
with the hearing and let the judge decide if the case should
proceed.
Provincial court judge Robert
Finley presided over both preliminary hearings and after they
had concluded, he had lunch with Miazga and Hansen who wanted
to thank the judge for how he treated the children during the
hearings.
"During the course of
the lunch, he conveyed to Ms. Hansen and me that he believed
what the children said insofar as the sexual assault allegations
were concerned.
"And the effect it had
on me was a confirmation from a person who had heard the whole
case, had seen the kids, had heard their cross-examination and
he believed what they said. That adds some support to the belief
I had," said Miazga.
He also testified that in the
1990s the test that he and other prosecutors applied in deciding
whether to proceed with a prosecution was two-fold: "that
there were reasonable and probable grounds to believe that an
offence has been committed, and that it was in the public interest
to proceed with that particular charge.
"It's test that was there
throughout the prosecution and it's something you would bear
in mind and reassess as often as you felt it was appropriate."
Miazga said he applied the
test throughout his prosecution of the 12 accused and based on
the interviews with the children and other evidence, he believed
he repeatedly met the test.
The court proceedings stopped
earlier than usual because not only was Miazga feeling unwell,
but Richard Klassen told the judge he was sick too.
On Monday when the case continues
and after McKillop finishes his questioning, cross-examination
of Miazga will begin.
© Copyright 2003 The StarPhoenix (Saskatoon)
|
Truth can never be
told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell