Revitalizing the archives From 1998 until 2002, injusticebusters was in the throes of an identity crisis. What was it? What were we doing? We grappled with editorial policy at the same time we were learning the nuts and bolts of building and posting a website. Once we had a secure, paid site I had full editorial control, although I talked regularly to Richard Klassen who was forced to move his family several times and did not always have access to the internet. I began following other threads to stories of police and prosecutorial misconduct and the site took on another facet to its character: a newsclipping scrapbook where stories could live longer than they would in print form. I also began picking up other stories of wrongfully convicted people. It was an explosion. By 2003 there were over 700 pages. I also had contact with several other people (Don Smith, Leon Walchuk, Monique Turenne, the Vopnis) and kept these stories going. When Richard Klassen began to make progress in bringing his civil claim to court, the government and police defendants alleged he was breaking the rules of court by publishing discovery material on the internet. This claim was absolutely false. However, rather than risk being thrown out of his civil claim, Klassen undertook before Judge Mona Dovall to sever all ties with the website. Now that some of the dust has settled, I have been going back through the material we had posted in the early days. In the spirit of keeping the scrapbook alive, I have been reformatting and placing links. The original material remains intact. I hope the information, which chronicles our struggle is useful to you. The identity crisis is over. We know who we are --Sheila Steele, March 28, 2005

QB 271 Pre civil trial

Fiat of Judge Mona Dovall

See report of hearing | Prosecutors' Statement as to Documents | Dueck's Statement as to Documents | Richard Klassen's Statement as to documents |

Richard Klassen holds bank draft he had to get for Dueck's lawyer to avoid being dismissed from civil claim SKQB271-94. David Gerrand took over defending Dueck from Saskatoon City Solicitor Barry Rossman after Rossman successfully duped the court January, 13, 2001. Klassen's lawyer at the time, Ed Holgate, neglected to file his client's affidavit answering to charges of breaking the rules of court. Judge Zarzaczny ruled against Klassen and ordered him to pay Dueck. Story at a glance

[1] The events that give rise to this civil action occurred between 1987 and 1993. Although allof th plaintiffs, being members of two families (the Klassens and Kvellos) were charged with sexual assault on various children, all of those charges were later stayed.

[2] On January 31, 1994, the plaintiffs commenced this civil action against numerous defendants involved in the conduct of their prosecution, some of which have had the civil claim dismissed as against them over the years for various reasons. The remaining defendants to the civil claim include two Crown prosecutors, the then Executive Director of Prosecutions, a peace officer, a child therapist and counsellor and the Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners.

[3] All of the parties exchanged their statement as to documents in 1995 and some seven years later the remaining parties are only at the exchange of documents and the examination for discovery stage of the litigation. Counsel for the defendants commenced examining the plaintiff, Richard Klassen, for discovery on behalf of all the plaintiffs on February 1 and 2, 2000. It became necessary for the examination for discovery of Richard Klassen to be adjourned to allow the defendants to bring a motion to prevent the plaintiffs from communicating certain things being disclosed during the discovery of documents and the examinations for discovery stage of litigation.

[4] In January, 2001, the defendants brought a motion pursuant to Rule 237 to restrain the plaintiffs from publishing transcripts or excerpts of transcripts of the examinations for discovery, information given or received during the examinations for discovery or documents or excerpts of documents obtained though disclosure in these civil proceedings as ell as an order pursuant to Rule 173 to stay or dismiss the plaintiffs' action pending compliance with the order made pursuant to Rule 237.

[5] On January 30, 2001, Mr. Justice T. C. Zarzeczny dismissed the defendants' motion to stay or dismiss the plaintiffs' action pending compliance with his order, however, made an order enjoining and restraining the plaintiffs from publishing, in any fashion, the transcripts of the examination for discovery in the action, any documents listed in any statement as to documents of any party to the action, any excerpts of such documents or any information from such examinations or such documents, except in the extent that use is required for proper conduct of this action.

[6] Justice Zarzeczny, however, left it open to the defendants to once again bring a motion to have the claim of the plaintiffs stayed or struck if the plaintiffs insisted upon publishing the information and documentation disclosed during the discovery stage of this civil action despite his order not to do so.

[7] At paragraph 20 of his fiat Zarzeczny J. states:

The order requested by the applicant to stay the plaintiffs' action pending compliance with the orders now issued or upon breach of them is presently denied. It is expected that the plaintiffs, including Richard Klassen, will comply with the spirit and intent of the Court's orders. If not, the applicant may renew this aspect of the application and the relief appropriate to the circumstances will then be considered by this Court.

[8] Unfortunately despite the order of January 30, 2001, the defendants, Dueck and the Saskatoon Board of Police Commissions, believe that one of the plaintiffs in this civil claim, Richard Klassen, has continued to provide non-parties with documentation and information he is receiving during this pre-trial stage in this litigation. The Court is thus once again having to deal with another motion by the defendants, Brian Dueck and Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners, to have the action of the plaintiff, Richard Klassen, struck or in the alternative stayed pending compliance by Richard Klassen with such direction and orders as this Court may prescribe on the basis of non-compliance with the previous court order of January 30, 2001. While the defendants believe that Richard Klassen has not complied with the spirit and intent of the order of January 30, 2001, Richard Klssen believes he has.

[9] Richard Klassen, as one of the plaintiffs, has also brought a motion requesting production of any and all reports of three police officers: an order producing Brian Dueck for the purpose of his being examined for discovery, an order that Richard Klassen pay only 10 cents per page as opposed to the 25 cents per page being claimed by the defendants for photocopies of documents he is requesting from the derendants, an order that the defendants provide him with a better and more descriptive list of the documents as listed in their statement as to documents and an order allowing him to bring with him a friend, Angela Geworsky, when he reviews the defendants' documents at their counsels' office in Regina.

[10] The Court will deal with each of the parties' motions separately.

1. Defendants', Brian Dueck and Saskatoon Board of Police Commissioners, motion to strike or alternatively stay the plaintiff, Richard Klassen's statement of claim

[11] The order of Mr. Justice Zarzeczny of January 30, 2001, provides:

1. That [the Plaintiff] Richard Klassen and all other plaintiffs who are parties to action Q.B. No 271/94, Judicial Centre of Saskatoon, and their counsel are enjoined and restrained from publishing, in any fashion, the transcripts of examinations for discovery in this action, any documents listed in any statement as to documents of any party to the action, any excerpts of such documents, except to the extent that use is required for the proper conduct of this action. 2. The plaintiff Richard Klassen shall pay costs, on a party/party basis, to the applicant Brian Dueck pursuant to column 4 of the Queen's Bench Tariff of Costs within 30 days of this fiat [on or before March 1, 2001].

[12] The basis of the Defendants requesting that Richard Klassen's action be struck or stayed is two fold:

(a) Richard Klassen has failed to comply with the order of Zarzeczny J. of January 30, 2001, in that he has failed to pay the agreed costs awarded against him in the mount of $1,240.00; (b) Richard Klassen has failed to keep confidential to this proceeding documents disclosed to him in the context of this action and the contents of examinations for discovery, contrary to law and contray to the specific direction of Zarzeczny J. in his order of January 30, 2001.

[13] The Court will address both grounds upon which the defendants are requesting that Richard Klassen's claim be struck or stayed.

(a) Richard Klassen's non-payment of taxable costs in the amount of $1240.00

[14] Although the taxable costs payable by Richard Klassen had been agreed to by the parties in March, 2001, as at February 14, 2002, Richard Klassen had still not paid the defendant, Brian Dueck, the agreed taxable costs in the amount of $1240.00.

[16] The Court does not accept Richard Klassen's excuse for non-payment by him of the taxable costs awarded against him over a year ago. He was well aware of the fact that the taxable costs had been awarded against him and that it had been agreed that he would pay $1,240.00. He knew that he was under an obligation to pay taxable costs in the amount of $1,240.00 and simply chose not to do so. The defendant, Brian Dueck, had no obligation to repeatedly ask for the taxable costs. As it turns out that aspect of the defendants' motion does not have to be determined by the Court as Richard Klassen delivered to the Court House at Saskatoon on February 15, 2002, a bank draft payable to David Gerrand in the amount of $1,240.00 representing payment in full of the taxable costs awarded against him in the order of Zarzeczny J. of January 30, 2001. It is the Court's understanding that these taxable costs have now been forwarded on to David Gerrand on behalf of his client, Brian Dueck.

(b) Non-compliance with the specific direction as contained in the January 30, 2001 order and the law to keep confidential information and documents disclosed during the discovery stage of this litigation.

[17] The second ground of the defendants' motion to strike or stay Richard Klassen's claim is by far the more serious. To strike or even stay a litigant's statement of claim is indeed an extreme remedy which the Court takes very seriously and only grants in a clear and obvious case. Everyone is entitled to their day in court, however, all parties to a civil action including self-represented litigants must follow the Saskatchewan Queen's Bench Rules of Court and the law and come into this court of equity with clean hands.

[18] The defendants' position was that, notwithstanding the clear wording of this Court's order of January 30, 2001, which Richard Klassen acknowledged that he had read, he had continued to provide documents disclosed to him in these civil proceedings to parties in other actions; had disclosed documents relating to this case to the press and had facilitated their publication in the media; and had disclosed the contents of the examination for discovery in this action and facilitated their publication on the Internet in an offensive manner contrary to the law.

[19] The evidence presented in support of the defendants' position that Richard Klassen was not complying with the previous order of this Court of January 30, 2001, included the statement of Donald A. McKillop, Q.C. as to what Richard Klassen had said to him on January 28, 2002; the comments of Richard Klassen to the Saskatoon StarPhoenix as reported on January 31, 2002; the contents of Richard Klassen's letter to D.A. McKillop, Q.C. of January 31, 2002 and the contents of the affidavit of Angela Geworsky sworn February 8. 2002.

[20] D.A. McKillop, Q.C. swore in his affidavit of January 31, 2002, that Richard Klassen had told him on January 28, 2002, that he would continue to feel free to circulate further documentation provided to him after acknowledging the contents of a notice of motion apparently signed by Johanna Erna Lucas that stated that Richard Klassen had been the one who had nade several thousand pages of documents available.

[21] In a letter dated January 31, 2002, to D.A. McKillop, Q.C., Richard Klassen states in the second paragraph:

I will request a full evidentiary hearing where I can address my reasons for making public the evidence regarding some of your clients allowing two eight year old girls to be violently raped and sodomozed while ignoring the girls' clear cries for help. Your defendants' objections that this evidence is classified as "private" because it sits in boxes of civil discovery material must be seen as a highly irregular misuse of the rules of court.

[22] An article in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix on January 31, 2002 reads in part:

Klassen fears he could be removed from the lawsuit, but believes he has a right to publish what he considers evidence of wrongdoing.

[23] A transcript of a CBC-TV Sask broadcast on February 1, 2002, reads in part:

CHRIS EPP [REPORTER]: Klassen has consistently revealed information about the case to the CBC program, The Fifth Estate. It has aired two documentaries about it. He also has a website on which he posts the information that he finds. . . . Klassen admits he has violated the ban but says he needs access to those documents.

[24] In an affidavit dated February 8, 2002, Angele Geworsky swore that she was present when Richard Klassen met with D.A. McKillop, Q.C. on January 29, 2002, and her recollection of the conversation was that Richard Klassen advised D.A. McKillop, Q.C. that "I could assure you that I would not show anyone anything, if I don't find any crimes to show."

. . .cont'd

Richard Klassen would like very much to thank the anonymous European donor whose generous contribution could not have come at a more helpful time. Please add your voice to our campaign for Federal Justice to intervene.

Chronology of this story from 1987 to now | More Judge Mona Duvall

QB 1994 271 | Peter Klassen and Michael Ross lawsuit | John Popowich lawsuit

Truth can never be told so as to be understood, and not be believ'd. William Blake, The Proverbs of Hell

Truth suppress'd, whether by courts or crooks, will find an avenue to be told. Sheila Steele, injusticebusters.com

If you hold the mouth of Truth, It will burst out its rib-cage. Somali proverb

Truth crushed to earth will rise again. --William Cullen Bryant

---

Publisher : Sheila Steele

Co-founder: Richard Klassen

Got something to say about this or any other stories on this site? Go to injusticebustersblog Participate!

injusticebusters court advice :

How to walk yourself through the justice system

 

Why you should dump your preliminary hearing (written July 1998 and still valid)

Our activism contributed greatly to the good vibes which happened around the civil trial. (More Links provided below)

Index to the stories on this website

This is not regularly updated so if you are looking for a particular story and you have a name or keyword, please use the site search engine(at the bottom of the page) which IS regularly updated

Index to Saskatoon Police stories

This is a pretty good scrapbook for the 1998-2002 period.

 

Pre civil trial

 

February 2002 hearings

Dovall fiat 1 | 2 | 3 |

Court report

 

 

The Klassen/Kvello civil Trial

 

StarPhoenix coverage

 

September 8, 2003: Trial Begins

September 09, 2003: Pamela Klassen Shetterly's Testimony

September 10, 2003: Anita Klassen

September 11, 2003: Michelle Ross

September 12, 2003: Sheila Verway

September 16, 2003: Michael Ross

September 18, 2003: Ellen Gunn

September 19, 2003: Terry Hinz

September 19, 2003:StarPhoenix editorial, Terry Hinz

September 20, 2003: Louis Dupuis

September 27, 2003: Ron Schindell, Jay Watson

October 01, 2003: Case

against the Klassens weak: documents

October 02, 2003: Judge asked to dismiss suit: No evidence of malicious intent: lawyers

October 2, 2003: Letter to the editor from former "Believe the children" advocate

October 03, 2003: Lawyer details evidence of malice

October 04, 2003: Judge ponders request to drop Klassen lawsuit

October 27, 2003: Judge Baynton's interim decision: Quinney dropped, the rest proceed

October 27, 2003: Claim goes forward

October 29, 2003: Brian Dueck

October 30, 2003: Dueck

October 31, 2003: Brian Dueck

November 01, 2003: Matthew Miazga

November 04, 2003: Matthew Miazga

November 05, 2003: Matthew Miazga

November 06, 2003: Sonja Hansen

injusticebusters' daily reports page 1

Final judgment: Dec. 30, 2003

Post judgment publicity

articles and editorials from Jan 6-9

Sabo's apology

Editorials: StarPhoenix, Leader Post and National Post

National Post front page story, Jan. 10

Sarah Gibb's profile of Richard and Kari Klassen |

Lives ruined by Jason Warick, Feb. 19

April 15/04: Judge Baynton warns defendants' lawyers not to delay damages trial

Dueck drops his appeal

Full transcript of Dueck's examinations for discovery which were part of the read-ins at the civil trial

 

 

Pre-sermonette Brash Comment

 

1998

 

Fall, 1998: Sask Sympatiko strikes again

2001

 

Muzzling the media

 

 

Sermonettes

2001

January: Legal Treachery to keep Dueck's lies safe

2002

March, 2002 -- Gay Bashing still a legal sport in Saskatoon -- Even when it turns to murder

 

2003

 

Feb. 1: Where we stand

Feb. 15, 2003: Has Saskatchewan learned anything?

March 1: Connecting the dots

March 23, 2003: From Micro to Macro

March 25, 2003: About libel and malice

March 27: Gangs of Saskatoon: the police and prison guards

April 28, 2003: The Naked Truth

May 5: How low will they go?

May 15, 2003: Come clean Calvert, Cline!

May 30: Still smearing Milgaard - defamation is alive and well on the lawn of the Regina legislature and Precendent has been set as we reclaim our institutions

June 11, 2003: --Eric Cline carries on a corrupt tradition

Nov 7: Courage -- the only reward is justice

November 20: Just following orders

November 24: Mayor Atchison, community policing and graffiti

November 25: Michael Jackson

November 30: Corrupt officials must be severely punished: otherwise they just keep on putting the administration of justice in disrepute!

December 1: Christmas comes early for injustice warriors

December 4: Wide open Saskatchewan?

December 16: Crawling through the tunnel of justice since 1991

December 24: The Crown keeps right on breaking the law

December 30: Who will find justice under their tree?

 

2004

 

January 1. 2004: Unprecedented publicity and Happy New Year

January 8, 2004: Malice still afoot

January 10, 2004: Shame and mugshots

January 14, 2004: Telling more truth about the undefamable: McKillop and Quennell, the static duo

January 17, 2004: Fifth Estate returns and A working class hero is something to be

January 22,23, 2004: Justice is still prevailing -- it is just taking longer and Bits and pieces are now coming together to tell the story of the century

January 27, 2004: Telling the truth about the undefamable, restoring reputations to the defamed.

February 5, 2004: Negotiations and strategies: getting an intransigent government to remedy its damage

February 10, 2004: How many lawyers does it take to ruin a province? and Lawyer continues to treat people's lives as a cruel game: monopoly?

Febrary 16, 2004: Calvert is not King Arthur

March 29, 2004: Counting down to the damages trial

April 16, 2004: The internet, the courts and now the movies -- We will so what it takes to get justice

May 1, 2004: If Frank Quennell is any example of what former Justice Minister Chris Axworthy called "evolving," Saskatchewan is ready to kiss justice good-bye!

May 27, 2004: Some observations on Saskatchewan and justice

June 7, 2004:Media coverage of Monique Turenne's story illustrates journalistic laziness

June 8:, 2004 -- The police not only failed to serve and protect Don and Lorna Smith and their children but set them up for false charges and community shunning

September 2, 2004: A tale of three cops: Dueck, Gobeil and Schinkel -- with an update on how they get away with criminal obstruction of justice

November, 2004: Wilfred Hathway, Atif Rafay and Sebastian Burns -- RCMP stings offensive to community standards

November 11, 2004: Rogue Platoon? Identifying the rotten apples in Saskatoon Police Service and why we need a full public inquiry into our whole justice system

November 28, 2004: Can Justice Minister Quennell take a few more steps? The Prosecutors' office is still harbouring crowns who put the administrative of justice in disrepute

November 12, 2004: Saskatchewan Justice in chaos: The Stonechild report suggests it is.

November 28, 2004: The price for being a good judge or a good prosecutor

December 30: When the government interferes with the judiciary, we know a Police State is a dangerous possibility (The government appeal of the Klassen/Kvello decision)

 

2005

 

Jan 1, 2005: Chewed up digested and spit out

Jan. 5, 2005: More on chief Sabo

February 18, 2005: Tunnel vision: Darren Koehn, Wilf Hathway and Leon Walchuk

March 2: Fixing the system: Time to quit talking and implement previous commission recommendations

March 19, 2005 : Injustice as ShowBiz