Some Canadian lawyers are too big to jail

Canada Lawyer SAN

How the corrupting influence of large law firms undermines Canada’s justice system and threatens self-regulation of the legal profession (Part 1 of a series)

“I see you as an embittered, vengeful, 82 year-old liar, stupid enough to espouse the desires of a venal Canadian backer, the pawn of totally incompetent counsel and of stupid and revenge-driven children.”

“Now, what happens if you die before the matter is resolved (as, at your age, you may)…”

“BITCH.
We will kill you while you are asleep. Lock your doors and windows real good.”

From a series of anonymous threatening emails sent to an 82 year old witness by unknown personnel from Miller Thomson LLP’s Toronto law office, and by other co-conspirators.*

by Donald Best

by Donald Best

This is the first of a series of articles that will examine the corrupting influence of large law firms, and how senior lawyers from some large Canadian law firms are Too Big to Jail; even when the evidence against them is devastating, irrefutable and uncontested.

Today we present an overview of concerns with the operations of large law firms. We also look at the financial pressures and greed that some lawyers and judges believe is motivating increased unethical and even criminal behavior by large law firm lawyers.

There have always been quietly discussed concerns within the Ontario legal profession, that large ‘mega’ law firms have become so powerful and influential that they dominate and skew trial outcomes, the justice system itself and the Law Society of Upper Canada (LSUC) that is responsible for the self-regulation of Ontario’s lawyers.

Some time ago the law society adjusted its system of electing regional ‘Benchers’ in an attempt to mitigate to some extent the dominance of the large Toronto law firms in the governance of the legal profession.

The law society changes, however, did not even begin to address concerns that the operations of mega law firms:

  • Limit access to justice for ordinary citizens and small to medium businesses,
  • Cause and conceal conflicts of interest that can harm clients,
  • Undermine national and public interests, and the political process, in the pursuit of profits above all else,
  • Compromise professional integrity in the pursuit of money and in ‘winning at any cost’ to attract and maintain large top-tier clients,
  • Receive unhealthy deference from the legal profession and the courts, and
  • Receive unhealthy deference from the Law Society of Upper Canada and other regulators in matters of misconduct and discipline.

Concerns about the impact of large law firms upon society and the legal profession are universal in North American jurisdictions. Some twenty years ago, now Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Robert A. Katzmann published:   Read more

Body cameras only a part of the solution to re-building trust in the police

police-body-video-camera

by Donald Best

by Donald Best

The Toronto Police recently announced a one-year $500,000 pilot project to outfit 100 officers with body cameras to record investigations and dealings with the public. At first look, $5,000 per officer seems outrageous until we consider that this is a pilot study with many facets of which the physical equipment comprises only a small portion of the budget. Online research shows dedicated police body cams starting at only US$199, but the data storage and management costs typically exceed the cost of the equipment by many times per year. The costs to outfit every Toronto officer would be many millions initially, with significant ongoing costs annually.

Nonetheless, the cost/benefit ratio to both the police and Canadians in general will, I strongly believe, fall on the side of implementing the system for every police officer in contact with the public or involved in conducting investigations.

As a former Toronto Police sergeant and undercover investigator of organized crime, I know that the simple knowledge that events are being recorded has a profoundly positive effect upon the behaviours of both police officers and citizens. Even the possibility of hidden recordings due to the universal presence of cell phone videocams is already having an impact upon officer behaviour, to the benefit of all concerned.

I have often relied upon hidden audio and video recordings because they present to the court and everyone the irrefutable truth. Such recordings are only a part of the evidence and have their own limitations, but at least they deter any liars on all sides from fabricating evidence and narratives out of thin air: or expose them after they have done so as more than a few rogue police officers in Canada and the USA have discovered lately.

Other citizens commented on a recent Globe and Mail editorial praising the Toronto Police initiative, that the real test of the police body cameras will be in whether the police and justice system actually use the video recordings to hold police officers accountable for serious wrongdoing.

Time for independent civilian oversight of Ontario’s lawyers?

At least with the police, there is independent civilian oversight on several levels as well as the efforts of the media and hardworking lawyers to try to ensure justice is done and also seen to be done. Not so with Ontario’s legal profession though.   Read more

RCMP and Crown prosecutors illegally distribute Senator Mike Duffy’s email password to the public

In the Duffy case, the RCMP and Crown prosecutor committed a criminal offence under section 402.2(2)

A cynic might say that the corruption trial of suspended Senator Mike Duffy has produced no surprises, but that does not do justice to most ordinary Canadians who, despite all the standard jokes about politicians, expect and demand that laws, rules and standards should apply equally to all; including to those in positions of power and authority such as police, lawyers and Crown prosecutors.

As Ezra Levant points out in the above video, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and Crown prosecutors released to the public, an unredacted version of Senator Duffy’s personal diary; including intimate communications with his wife, personal medical details and some of Senator Duffy’s Identity Information (as defined in the Criminal Code), including his email password.

Notwithstanding how disgusting it is that Canada’s national police agency and Crown prosecutors should have engaged in an act that is so obviously designed to embarrass and punish Mr. Duffy and his close family members, the release of Mr. Duffy’s email password is a criminal act, specifically prohibited by law in Canada. The fact that the reckless distribution happened in court documents is no excuse in law. Some would say the abuse of the court process makes the act even more reprehensible.

Best v Ranking civil lawsuit alleges prosecuting lawyers recklessly distributed to the public tens of thousands of documents containing Identity Information

As terrible as the actions of the police and the Crown are in the Duffy case, the amount of Identity Information illegally distributed pales in comparison with another case currently before the Ontario Superior Court.

In the Donald Best vs Gerald Ranking civil case, the plaintiff Donald Best alleges that defendants Gerald Ranking, Paul Schabas, Lorne Silver and others deliberately released and recklessly distributed to the public tens of thousands of unredacted privileged legal documents containing vast amounts of Identity Information and other personal and confidential information for Mr. Best, his family members and dozens of other persons who had nothing to do with the case before the courts.

In his March 31, 2015 affidavit asking the court to issue an injunction against the defendants, Mr. Best alleges:

“The defendants previously placed into the public domain, and recklessly distributed, tens of thousands of documents containing Identity Information and other private, confidential information for me, my family members and my company’s witnesses; and also for dozens and dozens of persons and entities who have nothing to do with me or my case.

As just one egregious example of thousands, defendants unlawfully took from the Orillia, Ontario law office of my company’s lawyers, the medical file of my lawyer’s dying mother, including end-of-life ‘do not resuscitate’ instructions to medical staff. The defendants and their ‘John Doe’ co-conspirators recklessly distributed this to members of the public, published it on the internet, and then filed it as ‘evidence’ with the court without notifying the judge. The defendants and their co-conspirators are still recklessly distributing this medical file in 2015. The defendants refuse to stop.”

Further, Mr. Best states:  Read more

Former police officer Donald Best analyzes the Walter Scott shooting raw video (#walterscott)

Citizen’s video prevented police cover-up of Walter Scott murder

By now you have probably seen the citizen video showing South Carolina police officer Michael T. Slager firing eight shots at the back of an unarmed man running from him. The victim, Walter Scott, age 50, died after being hit five times including once through his heart. Officer Slager is charged with his murder. (New York Times article with slow motion video)

According to the initial news accounts Walter Scott had been stopped for a burned out taillight but faced arrest for contempt of court for failing to pay child support. Whatever confrontation happened prior to the video is unclear, and at the immediate beginning of the video it looks like Scott or the officer could have dropped an object on the ground in front of the officer (said by some to be the officer’s Taser). There is also a second object that bounces on the ground behind the officer at about the time he is drawing his pistol.

What is clear from the video though is that Scott was running away from the officer, and was about 25 feet / 7 meters away when the police officer fired the first shot into his back. Scott kept running and the distance increased as Officer Slager fired off another quick six shots at Scott’s back. Then as Scott staggered, Officer Slager paused, took careful aim and fired a final controlled shot into Scott’s back. I wonder if that was the shot that pierced Scott’s heart because he went down immediately.

Police Officer does not behave as if he is fearful of Scott

Scott goes down grabbing his mid left side and only then does Officer Slager walk over and handcuff him. As he walks, the officer is not pointing his weapon at Scott and thus is not in fear of his life at that point. That is not the normal action of a police officer who believes a person might be armed. Even if an armed suspect has been shot eight times, any police officer would keep aiming at the suspect until the weapon had been retrieved and the suspect secured. That seems to indicate that Slager did not believe Scott had a weapon when he shot him.   Read more

Donald Best files Injunction Motion against Barbados Underground publisher Euclid Herbert, Ontario Provincial Police and civil case defendants

“Certain defendants illegally employed and illegally paid a serving Ontario Provincial Police Detective Sergeant ‘on the side’ for illegal private investigations of the Plaintiff and for illegal access to police personnel, records and resources, and for the exercise of police powers and authorities outside of normal systems, procedures and jurisdictions, to benefit defendants in a civil lawsuit…”

Ontario_Provincial_Police_Logo

Recently filed legal documents in the Ontario civil case Donald Best v Gerald Ranking ask the court to put a stop to the continued reckless distribution of Identity Information for the plaintiff Donald Best, his witnesses, their family members and other victims.

Best is also asking the judge to make the defendants, including police and lawyers, account for their past reckless distribution to the public of Identity Information and other private and confidential information. The Notice of Motion claims that some defendants maliciously placed this private information into the public domain through Euclid Herbert’s ‘Barbados Underground‘ website and by other means of distribution.

The full Notice of Motion including Donald Best’s March 31, 2015 affidavit with exhibits can be downloaded in .pdf form here: (March 31, 2015 Injunction Motion, 17mb)

QUICK DOWNLOAD: Injunction Notice of Motion and Donald Best’s supporting affidavit (without exhibits) here: (March 31, 2015 Injunction / Donald Best affidavit; no exhibits 1.8mb)

You can quickly read the Notice of Motion and Grounds here without downloading:   Read more

Paul Schabas seeking re-election as Bencher, Law Society of Upper Canada

Law Society Upper Canada

Toronto lawyer Paul B. Schabas, a partner at Blake, Cassels & Graydon LLP, is seeking a third term as a Bencher in the upcoming April 30, 2015 Law Society of Upper Canada election. Mr. Schabas is also a defendant in the Donald Best v. Gerald Ranking et al civil lawsuit.

According to his biography, Mr. Schabas is one of Canada’s leading media lawyers:

“As one of Canada’s leading media lawyers, Paul has appeared on many recent cases in the Supreme Court of Canada, including Grant v. Torstar, which established a new public interest defence to libel.”

No doubt Mr. Schabas is the ‘go to guy’ for many major news media outlets for libel defence, or for legal advice about whether or not to cover contentious or potentially explosive news stories.

Apparently Mr. Schabas was a bencher when Donald Best sent letters to him and other lawyers on December 1, 2009, alleging that lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver and Sebastien Kwidzinski lied to the court in a written ‘Statement for the Record’ they filed as evidence. Mr. Best’s letter can be found here. A summary of the incident is here: Donald Best secretly (and legally) recorded call with lawyers Gerald Ranking, Lorne Silver

Mr. Best also wrote to the Executive of the Law Society of Upper Canada on November 28, 2012, alleging amongst other wrongdoing by lawyers, that:

“There is also strong forensic evidence that a series of threatening and harassing anonymous emails to my witnesses originated from the computer systems of one of the involved large Toronto law firms (Miller Thomson), starting in at least 2004 and carrying on for many years. There is strong documentary evidence that the Miller Thomson law firm was provided with this evidence in writing in 2009 and 2010, yet the firm’s lawyer, Mr. Andrew Roman, withheld the evidence from the judge during my case: all the while arguing that his client and firm were not involved.”

Best’s November 28, 2012 letter can be found here. A summary of the incident can be read here: Court evidence: Anonymous online threats against 82 year old widow originated from Miller Thomson Law Office

Mr. Schabas is the current Chair of the Proceedings Authorization Committee which decides which cases against lawyers should go to a Discipline Hearing. The following excerpts are from his campaign website PaulSchabas.ca:   Read more

Lawsuits allege police and attorneys jointly fabricated evidence, lied to court

Two unrelated lawsuits in the United States and Canada allege that groups of police and lawyers worked together as they fabricated evidence and lied to the courts to jail a person they knew was innocent.

Although the circumstances and people involved in the two lawsuits are entirely unrelated, both plaintiffs’ allegations share similar characteristics: a group of police and lawyers fabricated false evidence, but they didn’t know about secretly-made recordings that documented the truth.

“If there is one thing that can be gleaned from the Douglas Dendinger and Donald Best civil lawsuits, it is that police officers have no monopoly over lawyers when it comes to lying to the courts.”

United States: Douglas Dendinger

Louisiana plaintiff Douglas Dendinger was arrested and charged with battery, obstruction of justice and intimidating a witness after five police officers and two prosecuting attorneys jointly provided false evidence that they saw Dendinger physically assault and intimidate a police officer as he served the officer with legal documents.

Each of the police officers and lawyers fabricated a false story, providing statements or sworn depositions that Dendinger slapped or punched officer Chad Cassard in the chest with “violence, force”, and that Cassard “flew back several feet”.

These police officers and attorneys didn’t know that Dendinger’s relatives made two hidden videos during the service of the legal documents. Those videos conclusively prove that Dendinger calmly handed the legal papers to officer Cassard, who smoothly held out his hand and accepted service in a normal manner.

The group of seven police officers and attorneys jointly lied and provided a false narrative to support charges that could have put Dendinger away for the rest of his life. Dendinger, who spent one night in jail, filed a civil lawsuit against the police and attorneys. The Washington Post reports But for the video…  WLTV reports Charges crumble after cell phone video uncovered

Canada: Donald Best

In the Best v Ranking lawsuit filed in Barrie, Ontario Canada, plaintiff Donald Best alleges that attorneys and police committed various wrongdoing, including fabricating false and deceptive evidence, lying to the court, committing a fraud upon the court by representing a phoney non-existent business entity, illegally hiring a corrupt Ontario Provincial Police officer ‘on the side’ to perform illegal acts and other misconduct.

One of Mr. Best’s allegations is that during a telephone conversation with lawyers on November 17, 2009, Best informed the lawyers multiple times that he had not received a certain court order. The lawyers even cross-examined Best about this very issue.

When the lawyers ended the telephone call with Best, they created as evidence an official ‘Statement for the Record’; falsely reporting to the judge that during the telephone call Best had told the lawyers that he had received and did possess the court order in question.   Read more

Investigative Solutions Network Inc. files defence in Best vs Ranking lawsuit

(Above: ISN CEO Ron Wretham interviewed by CBC’s Peter Mansbridge about the mystery tunnel recently discovered near the York University campus and the Rexall Centre; a tennis venue for Toronto’s 2015 Pan Am Games.)

Investigative Solutions Network Inc. is the first defendant to file a statement of defence in the Best vs Ranking et al lawsuit currently before Ontario Superior Court in Barrie, Ontario.

The February 12, 2015 statement of defence says in part:

“The defendant ISN is an Ontario corporation based in Pickering that is a full-service private investigations and training organization. The company provides investigative, security, training and screening services. The operating mind of ISN is Ron Wretham (“Wretham”).

In the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff has lumped the defendant ISN into a group of defendants referred to as the “Van Allen Defendants.” At the time of the matters at issue in this action, the defendant Jim Van Allen (“Van Allen”) was employed as an Ontario Provincial Police officer. Van Allen has subsequently retired from the OPP. Van Allen is now a consultant to ISN in the capacity of an executive trainer and as a threat and risk assessment analyst.

At some time in the latter part of 2009, the defendant Van Allen, while an OPP officer, contacted Wretham of the defendant ISN to inquire if he knew the address of the Plaintiff. Van Allen was not a consultant to ISN at the time. Van Allen was familiar with Wretham as Wretham was a retired Toronto Police officer. Van Allen was aware that the Plaintiff was a former Toronto Police officer. Wretham did not know the address of the Plaintiff, so he referred Van Allen to the defendant Toronto Police Association (“TPA”). As a former member of the TPA, Wretham believed that the TPA kept address information on its former members including the Plaintiff.”

ISN’s full statement of defence is available as a PDF download here (471kb) and on our Court Evidence page.

PricewaterhouseCoopers East Caribbean and all Barbados defendants default: fail to file defence in Ontario lawsuit

Ontario Civil Procedure Rules SAN

Claim: Defendants disobeyed Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure as deliberate strategy to ‘game’ legal system, delay process.

According to documents filed with Ontario Superior Court in the Donald Best vs Gerald Ranking civil lawsuit, after being served with the Statement of Claim and Jury Notice, all defendants from Barbados failed to file a defence, jurisdiction motion or otherwise respond to the lawsuit according to the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure.

Under Ontario Rule 19.02 (1) (a), each of the defaulting Barbados defendants is therefore deemed to have admitted all of the facts in Mr. Best’s Statement of Claim and has deliberately abandoned their right to defend before the Ontario Superior Court in a $20 million dollar lawsuit.

The defaulting Barbados defendants include:

  • Kingsland Estates Limited
  • Richard Ivan Cox
  • Eric Iain Stewart Deane
  • Marcus Andrew Hatch
  • Philip St. Eval Atkinson
  • PricewaterhouseCoopers East Caribbean (formerly ‘PricewaterhouseCoopers’).

To ignore a civil lawsuit in Ontario is serious business that has real consequences in law, including a legal presumption that the defaulters are admitting that everything in the Statement of Claim is true.

Mr. Mark Polley of Polley Faith LLP lawyers had been writing letters for five of the six the Barbados defendants starting only on the last day before they started to default, October 24, 2014. Mr. Polley did not file any defence or jurisdictional challenge within the 60 days allowed under the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure, or during eight weeks of courtesy time extensions. Presumably Mr. Polley acted upon instructions from each of his clients.

The Barbados defendants (with the exception of Mr. Deane, who has not been heard from since he was personally served in August 2014) recently brought a motion to have the court set aside their default, but this is apparently being contested by the plaintiff Donald Best as his lawyer Paul Slansky filed a counter motion.

Evidence filed with the court by the plaintiff states:

“From the start, Mr. Polley consistently, clearly and continually announced that his clients did not intend to respond to the Statement of Claim within the time allotted and in any manner consistent with the Ontario Rules of Civil Procedure. Despite multiple warnings over an eight-week time extension, Mr. Polley’s clients advertently decided to not file a Defence or to bring a motion to challenge jurisdiction.”

“…an obvious attempt to game the judicial system by deliberate and contrived delay.”

“I verily believe, and include evidence, that the Barbados Defendants’ and Deane’s joint default and failure to file a defence and/or jurisdictional motion to my Statement of Claim was deliberate and strategic, and came after their extensive consideration, almost certainly in legal consultation with senior lawyers and other defendants, as to the possible benefits, consequences and risks of this strategy to default. The default of all of these defendants shows a unity of purpose and a considered strategy amongst these parties.”

Will the court set aside or uphold the default of the Barbados defendants? The hearing is scheduled for March 13, 2015.

Here are court documents newly posted on the Court Evidence page at DonaldBest.CA:

As always we remind our readers that none of the allegations has yet been proven in a court of law, and to our knowledge none of the defendants has filed a Statement of Defence. Visitors to this website are encouraged to examine the legal documents and other evidence posted here, to do independent research and to make up their own minds about the civil lawsuit known as ‘Donald Best v. Gerald Ranking et al’. (Superior Court of Justice, Central East Region: Barrie, Court File No. 14-0815)

Defendant Iain Deane admits all allegations in Donald Best vs. Gerald Ranking civil lawsuit. Iain Deane in default of Ontario Superior Court.

Lawyer Andrew Roman and his client Iain Deane (right)

Miller Thomson lawyer Andrew Roman and his client Iain Deane (right)

According to documents filed with Ontario Superior Court in the Donald Best vs Gerald Ranking civil lawsuit, after being personally served with the Statement of Claim and Jury Notice, defendant Iain Deane failed to file a defence or otherwise respond to the court.

Under Ontario Rule 19.02 (1) (a), Deane is deemed to have admitted all of the facts in Mr. Best’s Statement of Claim and has deliberately abandoned his right to defend himself before the Ontario Superior Court in a $20 million dollar lawsuit.

Default (failing to answer a civil lawsuit) is serious business in Canada. 

Because Iain Deane abandoned the court process, Mr. Best does not have to serve Deane with any further legal documents. Best’s lawyer Paul Slansky has petitioned the court for a ‘Default Judgement’ against Mr. Deane for 19 million dollars. The case will be heard in June of 2015. In the event of a positive decision for Mr. Best, all of Iain Deane’s personal assets would be at risk to the amount of $19 million dollars. According to some lawyers, even if Iain Deane transferred assets to his spouse or others those assets would still be at risk.

Why would Iain Deane place himself and his assets gained over a lifetime at risk in this manner?

Why would Iain Deane not defend the serious allegations against him?

Why would someone accused of gross violations of criminal law and civil wrongdoing not present themselves before the court? According to evidence filed with the Ontario Superior Court, the plaintiff Donald Best alleges that:

“Iain Deane’s default and failure to file a defence to my Statement of Claim is deliberate and strategic, and that his decision to default came after extensive consideration, almost certainly in consultation with his lawyers and other defendants, as to the possible benefits, consequences and risks of this strategy to default.”

Further, evidence filed with the court states that:

“Iain Deane is aware that he and his co-conspirators face strong evidence implicating them in the overall Campaign and other acts of wrongdoing.

Iain Deane is aware that filing a Statement of Defence or otherwise answering my Statement of Claim would expose him to cross-examination and the production of evidence for the court that would further implicate him and his co-conspirators in the Campaign of harassment, intimidation, violence and other criminal acts. He knows that he and his co-defendants cannot possibly refute the evidence against them,

Iain Deane knows that the evidence against him and his co-conspirators includes irrefutable voice recordings, business records, internet records, court transcripts and legal records showing the commission of various criminal acts in support of the overall Campaign. This knowledge is strong motivation for Iain Deane and other defendants to default, because they know that they have no viable defence, and they do not want to add evidence to the already strong case against them.”

A copy of the Motion Record for Default Judgment against Iain Deane is available at DonaldBest.CA: 20141222 Deane Default Motion (PDF 6.1mb)

As always we remind our readers that none of the allegations has yet been proven in a court of law, and to our knowledge none of the defendants has filed a Statement of Defence. Visitors to this website are encouraged to examine the legal documents and other evidence posted here, to do independent research and to make up their own minds about the civil lawsuit known as ‘Donald Best v. Gerald Ranking et al’. (Superior Court of Justice, Central East Region: Barrie, Court File No. 14-0815)

1 … 17 18 19 20 21