Did lawyers assist in Justice Bryan Shaughnessy’s “disgusting” misconduct? #3 in a series
Big Law Firm lawyers Gerald Ranking (left), Lorne Silver & Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy
Did lawyers Lorne S. Silver and Gerald L. Ranking know of Justice Shaughnessy’s intentions? Did they assist? If so, they are co-conspirators with the judge.
In articles over the past months (listed below), we told how after court ended on May 3, 2013, Ontario Superior Court Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy went to a backroom where, off the court record, he secretly increased a prisoner’s sentence without a trial and without telling the self-represented prisoner (Donald Best). In that backroom, Justice Shaughnessy signed a secret new warrant of committal – that he did not place into the court record and that he provided only to prison authorities.
Several senior lawyers and a retired Crown Attorney called Justice Shaughnessy’s behaviour “disgusting”, “reprehensible”, “malicious” and “worthy of his removal from the bench.”
Donald Best complained of Shaughnessy’s misconduct to the Canadian Judicial Council – (Best’s Jan 5, 2016 12-page CJC complaint without exhibits. PDF 218kb).
After CJC Director Norman Sabourin summarily dismissed the complaint without conducting an investigation or providing reasons, Best’s lawyer filed for a Judicial Review of the CJC decision. That judicial review is now before the Federal Court.
Our second article in this series explained how big law firm partners Lorne S. Silver and Gerald L. Ranking certainly witnessed parts of Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct in court.
In Part #3 of this series, we look at evidence that lawyers Ranking and Silver actually participated in Justice Shaughnessy’s serious misconduct – perhaps secretly meeting with the judge in a backroom after court.
On May 3, 2013, lawyers Lorne S. Silver and Gerald L. Ranking were in court and witnessed Justice Shaughnessy state on the record that he was lifting the stay on his January 15, 2010 Warrant of Committal for Donald Best, and that Best would now be taken to prison to serve the sentence indicated on that January 15, 2010 warrant – for contempt of court during a civil case costs hearing.
On May 3, 2013, Silver and Ranking also witnessed Justice Shaughnessy state on the record that “Approval of the order by Mr. Best will be dispensed with and I direct that this order shall be prepared by Messrs. Ranking and Silver and presented to me for signature by Monday, May 6, 2013.” (May 3, 2013 transcript, pg 57, line 32)
Silver and Ranking also witnessed Justice Shaughnessy order that Best was never again to be brought before him.
Thus, Justice Shaughnessy ordered Ranking and Silver to create a Judgment Order to be presented to him on May 6, 2013, and also that self-represented litigant Donald Best was not to participate or be provided with a copy of the judgment order. This judgment order (download here) did not order the creation of a new warrant of committal or increase Best’s sentence, and was not the secret new warrant of committal signed by Justice Shaughnessy after court on May 3, 2013.
Secret new May 3, 2013 Warrant of Committal. Click to enlarge.
Justice Shaughnessy’s misconduct was premeditated with malicious intent.
Shaughnessy ordered in court on May 3, 2013 that:
1/ Best was not to participate in the creation of a judgment order, and,
2/ Best was never to be brought before Justice Shaughnessy again.
As indicated in Best’s complaint to the CJC, these orders on the record are evidence of Shaughnessy’s premeditation and malicious intent to secretly increase Best’s sentence after court, and to not place the new secret warrant of committal or increased sentence on the court record.
We know that after court ended on May 3, 2013, Justice Shaughnessy left the courtroom and went to a backroom where he signed a secret new order dated May 3, 2013 that illegally increased Best’s sentence. Best only learned of the order from prison authorities after his arrival at the Central East Correctional Centre in Lindsay, Ontario.
Did lawyers Lorne Silver and Gerald Ranking meet secretly with Justice Shaughnessy in a backroom after court on May 3, 2013?
We do not know at this point if Gerald Ranking or Lorne Silver knew in advance of Justice Shaughnessy’s intention to secretly increase Best’s jail sentence after court was over. Whether they knew or did not know in advance, is important evidence.
We do not know if Ranking and Silver learned of the secretly increased sentence and new warrant perhaps days or weeks afterwards – or, if Justice Shaughnessy secretly instructed them in a backroom meeting on May 3, 2013 to draft the secret new warrant of committal with the increased sentence.
Were the lawyers with Justice Shaughnessy on May 3, 2013 when he signed the secret warrant and illegally increased Best’s sentence? Did the lawyers draft the secret warrant upon private backroom instructions from the judge?
If lawyers Lorne Silver and Gerald Ranking had any part in the creation or delivery of the illegal and secret warrant of committal, or if they knew about it on May 3, 2013 or were present when Justice Shaughnessy signed it – then the lawyers are co-conspirators with the judge in his egregious misconduct.
What did the judge’s secretary and other court staff witness?
Justice Shaughnessy’s secretary and other court staff may have witnessed the lawyers meeting with the judge after court ended. The judge’s secretary and court staff may have knowledge of the creation and forwarding of the secret warrant of committal to prison authorities.
Drafts of the secret warrant warrant of committal might exist on court computers – or the secret warrant might have been created using one of the lawyers’ laptop computers and therefore does not appear on court computers.
CJC Executive Director Norman Sabourin summarily dismissed Best’s complaint without an investigation and without providing reasons.
Justice Shaughnessy, his court staff and lawyers Silver and Ranking must be witnesses in any valid CJC investigation or public inquiry – but so far both Lorne Silver and Gerald Ranking refuse to be cross-examined about any of their conduct in relation to Donald Best’s conviction, sentencing and imprisonment.
As indicated in our first two articles in this series, Justice Shaughnessy is now personally represented at the judicial review by Law Society of Upper Canada senior bencher Peter C. Wardle. Wardle has a conflict of interest as he also represented lawyers Lorne S. Silver and Gerald L. Ranking in a related matter.
With the Federal Attorney General representing the CJC, and the Ontario Attorney General absent after formerly representing Justice Shaughnessy, no one is representing the public interest at the judicial review.
.
Coming Next – Part 4: Should conflicted lawyer Peter C. Wardle resign from representing Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy?
Abandoning Public Trust: Conflicts of Interest by Ontario’s legal profession
The series…
Part 1: Justice Bryan Shaughnessy chooses conflicted lawyer as personal counsel in Judicial Review.
Part 3: Did lawyers Ranking and Silver assist in Justice Bryan Shaughnessy’s “disgusting” misconduct?
Part 4: Should conflicted lawyer Peter C. Wardle resign from representing Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy?
Part 5: Abandoning the Public Interest. When Canada’s legal profession, regulators and government circle the wagons to save club members, who looks after the interests of Canadians?
Part 6: Previous incident – How Justice Shaughnessy backdated a court order for lawyers Gerald Ranking and Lorne Silver.
… Additional articles in this series will be added later.
Background and Links
Background, supporting court documents and details of Justice Bryan Shaughnessy’s May 3, 2013 misconduct can be found in the following artlcles:
February 22, 2017: Canada Federal Court refuses to release Judge from Judicial Review of Misconduct Complaint
May 23, 2016: Affidavit filed in action against Canadian Judicial Council, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy
April 30, 2016: Federal Court Proceeding commenced against Canadian Judicial Council, Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy
March 31, 2016: Canadian Judicial Council refuses investigation of Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy. CJC says “No misconduct”
Feb. 9, 2016: Judge J. Bryan Shaughnessy under investigation by Canadian Judicial Council
March 9, 2016: Canadian Judicial Council remains silent on investigation of Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy
Read Donald Best’s article published in The Globe and Mail: Solitary confinement is pure torture. I know, I was there
Judicial Review Court Documents in the Public Record
January 17, 2017 Federal Court of Canada Order and Reasons (PDF 250kb)
April 14, 2016 – Notice of Application (PDF 711kb) by Donald Best for a Judicial Review of CJC decision.
April 27, 2016 Affidavit of Donald Best in two PDF files: Vol 1 (10.4mb) and Vol 2 (11.7mb)
December 2, 2016 Memorandum of Fact and Law (PDF 436kb) – Lawyer Paul Slansky for Donald Best
Copies of Best’s January 5, 2016 CJC Complaint, emails and exhibits
January 5, 2016 Complaint to CJC – 12 pages, no exhibits (pdf 218kb)
January 7, 2016 Receipt of Complaint – email (pdf 102kb)
January 21, 2016 Letter to CJC – (pdf 188kb)
February 4, 2016 Letter to CJC – (pdf 254kb)
Supporting Exhibits as sent to CJC with Complaint
In .pdf format. Some of the full court transcripts are rather large.
Exhibit & Description
- A January 15, 2010 Warrant of Committal (103kb)
- B May 3, 2013 Warrant of Committal (752kb)
- C January 15, 2010 Transcript (7.7mb)
- D January 15, 2010 Court Order (866kb)
- E January 25, 2010 Reasons On Motion For Contempt (702kb)
- F August 9, 2012 Transcript (5mb)
- G August 9, 2012 Endorsement (1.5mb)
- H August 9, 2012 Court Order (129kb)
- I October 12, 2012 Transcript (12.5mb)
- J October 12, 2012 Court Order (83kb)
- K October 12, 2012 & November 16, 2012 Endorsements (284kb)
- L November 16, 2012 Transcript (1mb)
- M December 11, 2012 Transcript (45.1mb Large File)
- N December 11, 2012 Endorsement (326kb)
- O November 16, 2012 Draft Order (94kb)
- P January 25, 2013 Transcript (9.7mb)
- Q January 25, 2013 Endorsement (234kb)
- R April 30, 2013 Transcript (2.3mb)
- S May 3, 2013 Transcript (9mb)
- T May 3, 2013 Judgment (255kb)
- U June 14, 2013 Appeal Court Order (83kb)
- V April 15, 2014 Order of Justice Molloy (334kb)
Notice from the Publisher
If any person disagrees with anything published at DonaldBest.CA or wishes to provide a public response or comment, please contact me at [email protected] and I will publish your writing with equal prominence. Comments left on articles are moderated at least once a day.
Public domain photo of Justice J. Bryan Shaughnessy has been modified to remove others in the background and is a new work by Donald Best. Photos have been included to put context to the article. Their use is the same as with other Canadian news outlets.
Donald Best
Barrie, Ontario, Canada
The question will be what does the Hearing Judge for the judicial misconduct believe? Based on all the evidence here on the website its pretty irrefutable testimony to wiggle away from. A bunch of snakes to deal with.
You stated to write to you if we dont agree with anything **I dont agree with any of the judges decisions or the CJC decision. They are corrupted individuals who have allowed fabricated evidence by these lawyers to muddy our judicial system and put our judicial system and its credibility to the edge**The only judge with enough sense would be the Federal Court Judge who has forced the dirty judge to pay your costs and answer to judicial misconduct.
The crooked lawyers worked with the judge and the corrupt judge gave them everything they wanted, rule of law be damned. That’s obvious to anyone. Ontario would be well served to remove this judge as soon as possible.
Why is the law society lawyer representing a member of the judiciary when if you try to complain against a judge to the law society they tell you you can’t do it because they do not regulate judge and no argument you make that you are complaining against a lawyer (turned judge and so is still a lawyer) they tell you no?
It is a fact that no judge can carry out bandooloo plan without the active support of lawyers so it goes without saying that the lawyers must have been in on it all along. Mr Best although they must have covered their tracks well, you should apply for the administrative notes of your case. Those notes can be quite telling.
When will the various levels of government in this country take accountability to the public seriously and stop allowing lawyers and judges to regulate themselves? They all take us for a joke. When are we going to demand this change?
Maybe that should be the next item on the agenda of groups such as Black Lives Matter or another functioning protest group.