The following is one of a series of occasional comments on my participation in the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry and includes my personal opinions, a form of expression protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.  Every effort is made to ensure factual statements are accurate.

….

My associate Neil Chantler and I represent the families of 18 missing and murdered women at the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry.  One other family is represented by counsel, but I haven’t seen their lawyer in attendance since the first morning.  As a result, our task in trying to reveal the whole truth about why it took police nearly five years to arrest the man considered responsible for up to 49 murders is a most daunting, uphill struggle against the most powerful entities in our society, who seem intent on packaging the case neatly for public consumption.

Consider these facts: the RCMP, the Vancouver Police Department and the Criminal Justice Branch have been working on these matters since 1997.  They have access to virtually unlimited public funds and, when it became apparent in 2002 that there would be serious questions about the conduct of the investigations, they put their lawyers to work.  The VPD retained the services of Farris LLP, one of Vancouver’s most respected litigation firms, and the RCMP called upon lawyers from the Canada’s Department of Justice.  These lawyers have been poring over the files for almost a decade.

We were retained to represent families in October, 2010, and we initially acted on a pro bono (without fee) basis.  We immediately applied for participant status and the Commission conferred such status on our clients concurrently with the RCMP, VPD and CJB, in January, 2011 “in advance of the other applicants due to their clear legal interest in the subject matter of the Commission.”

In February, 2011, without notice to us, the Commission reached an agreement with the other three participants about the manner in which their records would be vetted, redacted and disclosed.  We did not get access to any documents at all until June of 2011.  When we finally saw the files for the first time, we could tell that huge numbers of records were being withheld.  We started requesting proper disclosure, and we are currently preparing a compendious application for full disclosure, which we hope will be heard soon.  Department of Justice lawyers say there are over 2 million pages of documents in “the Project Evenhanded database”, but we’ve been given access to perhaps ten percent of that, “only” about 200,000 pages.  (The number changes daily, as documents continue to arrive, sometimes in a trickle, sometimes in a flood, even though the hearings are well under way).

So, let’s look at the playing field:

The RCMP, the VPD and the CJB have each had teams of lawyers carefully reviewing all the files for several years.  Mr. Chantler, myself and a paralegal have had four months to access and digest the material, heavily redacted, over the last four months.

The RCMP, the VPD and the CJB seem to have as much public funds as they need for their legal teams.  While the provincial government has commendably granted the families of the missing and murdered women funding for legal assistance, it is tightly limited.

The Commission itself has a staff of at least fourteen people, including at least eight lawyers, and has reportedly spent $2 million since October 2010 in preparation for this matter.  They have also retained “Independent Commission Counsel”, Jason Gratl and Robyn Gervais, who are obviously working extremely hard, but they have no actual clients to serve.

When I attend the hearing each day, I look around at the desks in the room and see the Commission’s lawyers plus teams of lawyers representing the RCMP, the VPD, the CJB, Vancouver Police Union, a VPD member and a former VPD member.  Any interested observer can gauge how interested all these other lawyers are in ferreting out the truth by attending the hearings or reading the transcripts.

So, a level playing field?  You be the judge.

They say a lawyer must be able to think on his/her feet and have a thick skin.  I had to call on both resources first thing this morning when, quite unexpectedly, Commissioner Oppal took me to task in the public hearing over a few questions I had posed to witnesses back on Octber 18 and 19.  At the time, no one, including Commission Counsel Art Vertlieb, Q.C., had objected to the questions, so it was rather a surprise to be confronted and questioned about a few moments of testimony that occurred two weeks ago.

I did my best to defend my conduct, and my success, or failure on that front can be ascertained from a review of the transcript of this morning’s proceedings.  I certainly respect Commissioner Oppal’s opinions and have no difficulty with him fairly expressing them.  I will continue to strive to represent the interests of my clients, the families of 18 of the missing and murdered women, in a way that is entirely consistent with my professional responsibilities.

The morning continued fairly uneventfully with Mr. Gratl’s submissions on his application for protection of vulnerable witnesses.

The federal government’s application for a publication ban may be heard later today.

2:40 p.m. update:  The Commission has adjourned for the day, without any formal indication of what may occur tomorrow.  Presumably, the federal government’s application for a publication ban will be on the agenda.  We continue to prepare material in support of our anticipated application for full disclosure of relevant records, and for a brief adjournment to enable us to digest the documents in the event we are successful.  It seems like that may come on for hearing after the testimony of VPD Deputy Chief Lepard, who takes the stand Monday.

As the media have had questions about our application tentatively set for Thursday, November 3, 2011, which was characterized as an application for an adjournment, we should clarify that we are applying for both further and better document disclosure and an adjournment for a reasonable period in order us to prepare to cross-examine D/C LePard and the other police witnesses who are apparently scheduled to testify during the week of November 7, 2011.

Counsel have been told to expect the receipt of a report from Peel Regional Police Deputy Chief Jennifer Evans, who has been reviewing the police files for about a year, by today, October 31, 2011.  The report is expected to a critical analysis of the missing women investigation, similar to the subject matter of D/C LePard’s anticipated testimony, but we have not yet seen it.

The Vancouver Sun is reporting that Attorney General/Solicitor General Shirley Bond will announce today that the Missing Women Commisssion of Inquiry will have its term extended for another six months, presumably to June 30, 2012.

We have not received any confirmation of this yet and continue to struggle with the uncertainty surrounding the proceedings.  For instance, late yesterday Commission Counsel Art Vertlieb announced that next week’s scheduled witnesses –  RCMP C/Supt. Robert Morrison, Supt. Jim Gresham, C/Supt. Janice Armstrong , Mr. Max Xiao,  VPD  Superintendent Jeff Sim and Police Board representative Elizabeth Watson – would actually not be attending the hearings next week and may be coming at some later date.  That news caught us by complete surprise, as we had been busily preparing to cross-examine them on their evidence.

We’ve been told that the long-awaited report of Peel Deputy Chief Evans (who has been working with the files for a year) will be delivered by Monday.   Next week’s hearing schedule, at  least at this moment, is said to include testimony from Susan Davis and Elaine Allan, to be followed by an application for an order protecting vulnerable witnesses and some sort of hearing to deal with the RCMP and VPD lawyers’ concerns about publication of “sensitive” information.

We look forward to attempting to address these evidentiary issues in the hearings.  At this point, it appears to us that the RCMP and VPD are trying to keep the tightest possible lid on the evidence that might lead the public, and our clients, to the truth.  If this inquiry is to fulfill its mandate, the lid will have to be pried off to expose the entire story, however messy it may be, to the Commission’s scrutiny.

Today was the first day of testimony from the families of the missing and murdered women.  Jan Brongers, one of the Department of Justice lawyers representing the interests of the RCMP , opened proceedings by magnanimously stating that RCMP lawyers would not be subjecting the relatives of the missing and murdered women to cross-examination.  Any relief that the families may have felt as a result of that announcement must have dissipated later in the day, when David Crossin and Sean Hern, two different lawyers representing Vancouver police interests, spent most of the afternoon questioning Lynn Frey about the accuracy of her recollection of events occurring some 13 years ago.   Mr. Crossin is one of the lawyers representing the Vancouver Police Union and some of its members, while Mr. Hern is one of the lawyers representing the Vancouver Police Department, the Vancouver Police Board and most of their members or former members.  Both suggested that VPD Detective Lori Shenher would have a different recollection when she testifies.  It is not yet clear when, or even if, Det. Shenher will take the stand.

We expressed a concern about what had unfolded, stating that the interests of these police participants “seem to be indistinguishable” and that we would object if their lawyers’ cross-examinations became repetitive.  This caused a stir in the gallery and Commissioner Oppal encouraged spectators to remain quiet.

The Inquiry continues tomorrow with more testimony from Lori-Ann Ellis, a relative of Cara Ellis.  Ernie Crey, brother of Dawn Crey and a well-known First Nations activist, is expected to testify Wednesday.