|
Previous
< < <
Superintendant
Brian Dueck finally dropped his appeal July 18, 2004 | Final
judgment: Dec. 30, 2003 | injusticebusters'
daily reports
33
1 A I would say it was after
the disclosure by the
2 children, as we started looking
into the
3 background of this.
4 156 Q Would you undertake
to provide the first time
5 that you may have been provided
the name Marie
6 Klassen?
7 A It would have been in the
disclosures of the
8 children as we went through
it, that was the
9 first time I'd ever heard
it.
10 157 Q There are many hours
of disclosures by the
11 children, there are many
notes and statements,
12 and the audio tapes and
video tapes are
13 enormous. I just ask you
to make an inquiry to
14 determine when you may have
heard the name Marie
15 Klassen used in the context
of sexual abuse of
16 children?
17 A I would suggest it would
be in those disclosures
18 of 1990.
19 158 Q Okay. So October of
1990?
20 MR. GERRAND: Well, the interviews
took place
21 over October-November of
1990. You have been
22 provided with copies of
the transcription of
23 those interviews. The witness's
evidence is
24 that's the first disclosure
of the name, the
25 identification.
26 MR. BORDEN: I appreciate
that.
34
1 159 Q So what you are telling
us, then, is of course,
2 in the disclosure the name
Marie Klassen comes
3 up?
4 A That's right.
5 160 Q Now after the children
refer to Marie Klassen
6 did you pay her a visit?
7 A I don't believe so.
8 161 Q Did you know by the
fall of 1991 that Marie
9 Klassen was at least in a
wheelchair from time
10 to time, and I'm not saying
confined to a
11 wheelchair, did you know
that she was in a
12 wheelchair?
13 A Not till the fall of 1990
-- or, I should say,
14 at the time of the arrests
in July of 1991, no.
15 162 Q Prior to the arrests
of July of 1991, had you
16 determined that Marie Klassen
had a medical
17 condition called right bilateral
hemiparesis?
18 A No, I hadn't.
19 163 Q Had you learned that
she was paralyzed on one
20 side, have you ever learned
that?
21 A I've learned it since,
yes.
22 164 Q When did you first
learn that she was paralysed
23 on her right side?
24 A I think it was after the
arrests or at the time
25 of the arrests.
26 165 Q Did you know that
Marie Klassen was a member of
35
1 the Canadian National Institute
for the Blind?
2 A No.
3 MR. BORDEN: Do you have the
glasses here,
4 please?
5 166 Q Do you know that today,
that she was, in fact, a
6 member of CNIB?
7 A No.
8 167 Q Prior to your making
the arrest of Marie Klassen
9 was there at any time that
you visited her home
10 to look at the layout or
the location of various
11 rooms that the children
may have been in?
12 A No.
13 168 Q I present to you glasses
that belonged to Marie
14 Klassen, have you ever seen
these glasses
15 before?
16 A No, I haven't.
17 MR. BORDEN: I'm going to
have them just
18 marked for identification.
19 MR. GERRAND: Well, I don't
think so. I object
20 to your marking them for
identification. The
21 witness has said he's never
seen them and you
22 can't present them as evidence.
23 MR. BORDEN: That's fine.
24 169 Q So you've never seen
those glasses, that's what
25 your counsel said?
26 A That's what I'm saying.
36
1 170 Q And you didn't know
she was a member of CNIB?
2 A No, I didn't.
3 171 Q Did you ever have an
occasion to talk to her by
4 phone?
5 A Not that I recall.
6 172 Q Did you recall her
slurred speech at any time?
7 A No.
8 173 Q Did you ever see her
walking?
9 A The day that we arrested
her, yes.
10 174 Q So the day that you
arrested Marie Klassen she
11 was, in fact, walking?
12 A Well, I believe she had
a walker.
13 175 Q Oh, she had a walker?
14 A Yes.
15 176 Q Did you ever mark
in your notes to prosecutors
16 that, in fact, she was in
a walker?
17 A No, I don't think so.
18 177 Q Did you show up and
arrest Marie Klassen?
19 A Yes, I did.
20 178 Q Prior to your arresting
her did you do an
21 investigation of Marie Klassen
in relation to
22 the following: the location
of her home?
23 A Yes.
24 179 Q The address of her
home?
25 A Yes.
26 180 Q Did you determine
the actual position of her
37
1 bedroom as it relates to
the kitchen?
2 A No.
3 181 Q Did you go inside her
home prior to your
4 arresting her?
5 A No.
6 182 Q Did you ask for a search
warrant to actually
7 investigate her home?
8 A No.
9 183 Q Did you ask for a search
warrant to seek from
10 that home any physical evidence?
11 A No.
12 184 Q And is it your evidence
today that at no time
13 did you talk to Marie Klassen?
14 A Not that I recall.
15 185 Q At the time that you
visited Marie Klassen for
16 the first time you said
that she was in a
17 walker?
18 A I believe she was using
a walker, yes.
19 186 Q Now you're saying
the words "I believe she was
20 using a walker," was
she using a walker or not?
21 A I believe she was, yes.
22 187 Q And where did you
see her walk from or to?
23 A I saw her through the
front window of the home
24 as we rang the bell.
25 188 Q And what was she walking
from?
26 A I don't recall.
38
1 189 Q And where was she walking
to?
2 A Towards the back of the
house.
3 190 Q The back of the house.
So you were able to see
4 through a window, then?
5 A Right.
6 191 Q That she was walking
on a walker to the back of
7 the house?
8 A Right.
9 192 Q Did you at any time
go and report to Matt
10 Miazga, the prosecutor,
one of the defendants
11 here, or Sonja Hansen, one
of the defendants
12 here, or any other person
with the prosecutors
13 department, that you saw
Marie Klassen actually
14 use a walker?
15 A I don't believe so.
16 193 Q When did you determine
that she was, in fact, in
17 a wheelchair?
18 MR. GERRAND: He hasn't --
19 A I haven't said I did.
20 MR. GERRAND: -- given that
evidence, Mr.
21 Borden.
22 194 Q MR. BORDEN: Okay.
So you had never been
23 given that evidence, Officer,
that she was, in
24 fact, using a wheelchair?
25 A No.
26 195 Q Did you see her at
a preliminary hearing
39
1 involving her case?
2 A No, I never attended the
preliminary hearing.
3 196 Q So you never had a
chance to meet her, then,
4 other than on the day and
date that you laid the
5 charges against her?
6 A That's right.
7 197 Q The allegation against
Marie Klassen was made by
8 Michael, was it?
9 A The girls, as well.
10 198 Q All right. Let's start
with Michael, what did
11 you understand the allegation
as it relates to
12 Marie Klassen to be?
13 A The allegations were of
touching, of sexual
14 touching. I don't recall
specifically, I'd have
15 to look at the transcripts.
16 199 Q Did Michael Ross say
that Marie Klassen was, in
17 fact, sexually touching
him?
18 A That's right.
19 200 Q And how was that,
as you recall it?
20 A As I say, I don't recall
specifically, I recall
21 that generally as the disclosure.
22 201 Q Did you recall how
many times Marie Klassen may
23 have touched Michael, according
to his
24 allegations?
25 A I don't recall.
26 202 Q Do you recall where
those may have happened?
40
1 A There were several locations,
as I recall, the
2 children talked about Marie
and her husband
3 having lived with Pam Klassen,
there were
4 different homes. I don't
recall specifically.
5 I don't think the children
ever said specific
6 addresses.
7 203 Q So you're saying that
in all the disclosures
8 regarding Marie Klassen the
children didn't say
9 where these acts occurred?
10 A Are we talking street
locations?
11 204 Q Any location.
12 A I don't recall them ever
naming a street
13 location for that, no.
14 205 Q When you visited Marie
Klassen for the purpose
15 of laying criminal charges
against her, what
16 address did you show up
at?
17 A I believe it was 524 Avenue
K North.
18 206 Q Do you know how long
Marie Klassen had actually
19 lived at 520 [sic] Avenue
K North?
20 A I don't recall right now.
21 207 Q Did you think that
some of the acts may have
22 occurred at that residence?
23 A I'm not sure.
24 208 Q Did you know where
Marie Klassen was alleged to
25 have lived prior to 524
Avenue K North?
26 A I can't recall off the
top of my head, no.
41
1 209 Q Did you ask for search
warrants in relation to
2 any of the houses that Marie
Klassen may have
3 lived in between the years
1987 and 1991?
4 A No, I did not.
5 210 Q Did you ever get any
bedding or sheets from any
6 of my clients' homes that
might contain saliva
7 or semen or blood?
8 A No.
9 211 Q Why was that, Corporal
[sic] Dueck?
10 A Because I had no -- I
had no justification for
11 looking for search warrants
for any of that.
12 212 Q The children had alleged
that there were sexual
13 acts that occurred in each
one of these homes --
14 A Right.
15 213 Q -- belonging first
to Dale and Anita and then to
16 the home of Pam Klassen
and her father, Peter?
17 A Right.
18 214 Q And her mother, Marie?
19 A Right.
20 215 Q Why did you make a
decision not to go into those
21 homes and to take from them
certain clothing,
22 bedding and the like?
23 A Well, I think you know,
Mr. Borden, that
24 information has to be recent
and, certainly,
25 none of that information
was recent enough to
26 obtain a search warrant
to search for anything.
42
1 216 Q All right.
2 A The children had been out
of the home for well
3 over a year by the time those
disclosures were
4 made.
5 217 Q Is it not the case,
Superintendent Dueck, that
6 in the basement of certain
homes there were
7 allegations of sexual acts?
8 A Right.
9 218 Q And sometimes on the
bare basement floor?
10 A I don't recall bare basement
floor ever being
11 said. I recall the children
saying that there
12 were blankets or those sorts
of things.
13 219 Q Did you ever make
inquiries in each one of those
14 houses as to the nature
of the basements and
15 whether there was even a
place to conduct these
16 kinds of sexual acts?
17 A No.
18 220 Q Did you ever go down
into the basements?
19 A No.
20 221 Q Did you ever determine
whether there was any
21 beds or sofas in the basements?
22 A No.
23 222 Q Did you ever determine
whether there were any
24 mattresses or --
25 A No.
26 223 Q -- other like furniture
that might have been
43
1 used for sexual acts?
2 A No.
3 224 Q when the children described
being on the floor
4 of any of these houses, including
the basements,
5 did you ask any further questions
as you recall
6 as to the nature of the bed?
7 MR. GERRAND: Ask any questions
of whom?
8 MR. BORDEN: Fine.
9 225 Q We're at a point now
where we're talking about
10 your interviews with the
children, and Michael,
11 for instance, may have said,
well, we had been
12 touched improperly by Peter
Klassen. Did you
13 ask him on what kind of
device or bed he may
14 have been touched?
15 MR. GERRAND: Don't answer
that question. All
16 of the questions and answers
with respect to the
17 interviews have been transcribed
and are
18 reproduced. I don't think
it's fair to ask this
19 witness at this stage what
he asked and what he
20 didn't ask. It was 12 years
ago and I don't
21 think he can remember all
that kind of detail.
22 226 Q MR. BORDEN: Mr. Gerrand
has indicated
23 that we have all of the
evidence. In other
24 words, we have all of the
tapes of your
25 interviews with the children;
would you agree
26 with that?
44
1 A As I understand you do,
yes.
2 MR. GERRAND: If you have
a specific question
3 with respect to a question
that was put during
4 those interviews, put the
specific question to
5 the witness.
6 MR. BORDEN: No, that's fine.
7 227 Q Your counsel, however,
has said that we have
8 everything here --
9 MR. GERRAND: No, I haven't
said that. I have
10 said that you have the transcripts
of the
11 interviews. You are now
asking Superintendent
12 Dueck about interviews of
the children that were
13 conducted in the fall of
1990, you're asking him
14 specific questions about
those interviews. The
15 transcriptions of those
questions and answers
16 that were put to those children
are here for
17 you. My point was, I'm not
sure that it's fair
18 to put to the witness general
questions about
19 what was said and what was
not said during those
20 interviews when the words
that were used have
21 been produced to the plaintiffs
and counsel is
22 familiar with them. It doesn't
seem to me that
23 it's fair to ask him about
generalities when we
24 have the specific evidence.
25 MR. BORDEN: I appreciate
that very much.
26 228 Q Your counsel has just
indicated that we have
45
1 everything, essentially,
in a time period of the
2 fall of 1990, October-November
there were
3 interviews that you had with
the children?
4 A Right.
5 229 Q And your counsel has
said that if we want to
6 know what you asked all we
have to do is look at
7 the transcripts of those
interviews; is that
8 correct?
9 A I would say so, yes.
10 230 Q And that whatever
you may have asked will be
11 found there in the transcripts?
12 A Yes.
13 231 Q MR. BORDEN: Or on
the video tapes themselves,
14 Mr. Gerrand. Is that correct,
Superintendent
15 Dueck?
16 A I would say so, yes.
17 232 Q Or in the audio tapes,
if any audio tapes were
18 made of those interviews;
is that correct?
19 A That's right.
20 233 Q Right. So let me deal
now with something else.
21 Did you have any interviews
with any of the Ross
22 children that were not video
taped or audio
23 taped?
24 A No. Where I questioned
them?
25 234 Q Yes.
26 A No.
46
1 235 Q Because I understand
that you actually visited
2 Mr. Thompson and his wife
at a Taco Time in the
3 fall of 1989 and that was
not video taped, that
4 was not audio taped?
5 A Right.
6 236 Q According to your evidence
that wasn't even
7 written down --
8 A Right.
9 237 Q -- because you can't
seem to find any of the
10 recording of that?
11 A That's right.
12 238 Q Were there any other
times other than on video
13 or audio that you met with
those children?
14 A I met with them at Carol
Bunko's, I would stop
15 in when they were in for
their therapy.
16 MR. BORDEN: Well then, that's
what I'm
17 getting at, Mr. Gerrand,
I had asked him the
18 specific question whether
in his interviews with
19 the children whether or
not he had asked them --
20 A I didn't interview the
children at Carol Bunko's
21 though.
22 239 Q Okay, fine. Let's
make this very clear.
23 A Sure.
24 240 Q The only interviews
that you had with the
25 children, then, began in
about October and
26 November of 1990; is that
correct?
47
1 A That's right.
2 241 Q And all of the interviews
that you had with the
3 children were, in fact, recorded?
4 A That's right.
5 242 Q They were either recorded
by an audio tape or
6 video tape?
7 A They were all recorded
by video tape, there were
8 no audio tapes.
9 243 Q So that, as you understand
it, we have been
10 provided with all of the
video tapes?
11 A That's right.
12 244 Q Mr. Gerrand said all
we have to do is look at
13 those video tapes, then,
to determine the
14 questions that you did ask?
15 A That's right.
16 245 Q And now, for the record,
was there any other
17 time that you had discussions
with the children
18 other than on those video
tapes?
19 A Discussions regarding
disclosure or just
20 visiting them?
21 246 Q Just visiting them.
22 A Certainly I visited them.
But we did not
23 discuss any allegations
in those visits.
24 247 Q And so, if I were
to ask you whether you wanted
25 the children to be more
precise in the location
26 of certain sexual acts,
again, your counsel has
48
1 said all we have to do is
look at the video
2 tapes for the answers?
3 A That's right.
4 248 Q Did you know the plaintiff,
Pamela Klassen?
5 MR. GERRAND: When?
6 249 Q MR. BORDEN: At any
time, did you know the
7 plaintiff, Pamela Klassen,
at any time?
8 A The first I heard of Pamela
Klassen was during
9 disclosures, and certainly
I met her after that.
10 250 Q And when you met her,
did you meet her for the
11 first time when you were
arresting her, as well?
12 A No.
13 251 Q Did you have a meeting
with Pamela Klassen at
14 any time prior to her arrest?
15 A Yes, I did.
16 252 Q And did you actually
interview her?
17 A I tried to, yes.
18 253 Q You tried to interview
her. Where did you try
19 to interview Pamela Klassen?
20 A At her home.
21 254 Q And at her home in
Saskatoon; is that correct?
22 A That's right.
23 255 Q Was that the same
home, 524 Avenue K North,
24 Saskatoon?
25 A No.
26 256 Q What home was that
at that time?
49
1 A I believe it was in the
200 R South.
2 257 Q 200 Avenue R South
is where she lived. Who did
3 she live with at that time?
4 A I have no idea, other than
her living there.
5 258 Q Prior to your meeting
with Pamela Klassen, prior
6 to your talking with her,
did you determine
7 whether this lady had a criminal
record?
8 A No, I did not.
9 259 Q Prior to your arresting
Pamela Klassen did you
10 determine whether she had
a criminal record?
11 A Yes, I did.
12 260 Q And did she?
13 A I don't recall. I don't
think so, but I don't
14 recall.
15 261 Q You have your documents
and, again, I'm sure
16 that you reviewed your documents.
Are you
17 saying that you don't recall
whether Pamela
18 Klassen had a criminal record
or not?
19 A I don't recall.
20 262 Q Are you saying, then,
that prior to the arrest
21 of Pamela Klassen you may
or may not have made
22 inquiries as to whether
she had a criminal
23 record?
24 A I'm sure I made inquiries
as to whether she had
25 a criminal record, I just
don't recall whether
26 she had one or not.
50
1 263 Q I've indicated who
my plaintiffs are, my
2 clients, did any of those
plaintiffs or clients
3 have criminal records?
4 A Yes, I believe Richard
Klassen did.
5 264 Q Did any other person
have a criminal record?
6 A Not that I recall.
7 265 Q For instance, did Marie
Klassen have a criminal
8 record?
9 A As I said, not as I recall.
10 266 Q Prior to your laying
charges against Pamela
11 Klassen, did you have the
opportunity to visit
12 with a prosecutor and at
that time talk about
13 the case and see whether
or not there was
14 sufficient evidence to even
lay charges --
15 A Yes, I did.
16 267 Q -- against Pamela
Klassen? And who did you
17 visit at that particular
time?
18 A Who did I visit?
19 268 Q Yes.
20 A The file was taken by
Matt Miazga and Sonja
21 Hansen and that's who I
conferred with.
22 269 Q When did you first
meet Matt Miazga regarding
23 allegations of the Ross
children against the
24 plaintiffs in this case?
25 A I believe it would have
been early June of 1991.
26 270 Q And was it at that
time that Sonja Hansen, one
51
1 of the defendants in these
proceedings, was also
2 appointed to --
3 A I'm not sure she was there
--
4 271 Q -- assist with the
prosecution?
5 A I'm not sure she was there
for the first meeting
6 I had with Matt Miazga, but
she was there after
7 that, yes.
8 272 Q And when you met Matt
Miazga in June of 1991, as
9 it relates to Pamela Klassen,
did you provide
10 information to him regarding
her?
11 A I had left the file there
approximately the end
12 of April, at the prosecutor's
office, so it
13 could be reviewed.
14 273 Q Do you have the file
here for view, so I could
15 get it marked?
16 (Discussion off the record)
17 MR. BORDEN: Mr. Gerrand,
in order to ensure
18 that your client has the
file that he presented
19 to Matt Miazga, we'll take
a short break so you
20 have a chance to review
that with him. I don't
21 want him saying this is
the file unless, in
22 fact, it was. He's just
indicated some of the
23 pages attached to that weren't
there at the time
24 he presented it to Mr. Miazga.
Would you like
25 some time?
26 MR. GERRAND: Okay, we'll
review that. But
52
1 that's his memory.
2 (Examination recessed briefly,
then reconvened)
3 MR. GERRAND: We've reviewed
a number of our
4 disclosed documents. The
question was, I think,
5 of Inspector [sic] Dueck,
whether or not he
6 recalled what file material
was given to the
7 prosecutor's office in the
spring of 1991. He's
8 reviewed the documents and
in our statements as
9 to documents, in these defendants'
statement as
10 to documents, the documents
numbered 531(a)
11 through 610 are, to the
best of Superintendent
12 Dueck's recollection those
documents that were
13 given to the prosecutor
that spring.
14 A I'd like to make one other
clarification here.
15 You had asked earlier regarding
Dr. Jon Conte
16 and I saw this in here regarding
discussing with
17 him. Now the report that
I left -- I still
18 don't recall speaking to
him -- the report says
19 "we spoke to him"
and to the best of my recol-
20 lection I believe that could
have been Liz
21 Newton, but certainly it
was not me that spoke
22 to him regarding the ritualistic
allegations
23 that were laid against the
Rosses and White.
24 274 Q MR. BORDEN: I'd like
to deal with that now
25 and get this put away. You
never dealt with Dr.
26 Jon Conte?
53
1 A Not that I recall, no.
2 275 Q You never saw anything
from Dr. Jon Conte in
3 relation to these charges?
4 A No.
5 276 Q You saw Dr. Jon Conte
at a seminar?
6 A That's right.
7 277 Q You may have received
some written material from
8 Jon Conte that may have been
disseminated at the
9 seminar?
10 A That's right.
11 278 Q But as it relates
to the cases against the
12 Kvellos and the Klassens
your evidence is and
13 has been that whether charges
were laid or not
14 had nothing to do with an
opinion of a Dr. Jon
15 Conte?
16 A That's right.
17 279 Q There is a reference
made to someone having had
18 a conversation or correspondence
with Dr. Conte?
19 A Right.
20 280 Q You think that that
person may have been Liz
21 Newton?
22 A That's what I believe.
23 281 Q Did Liz Newton provide
you with a copy of
24 anything from Dr. Jon Conte?
25 A Other than at the seminar,
no.
26 282 Q Did you ask Liz Newton,
prior to your laying
54
1 charges, whether or not she
had any information
2 that might be helpful from
any one of these
3 experts at the two seminars?
4 A We certainly spoke about
that whole area, but
5 again, I would go back to
the police view of
6 that being that there is
no such thing as
7 ritualistic abuse, it's either
sexual or
8 physical abuse in the Criminal
Code, as you're
9 well aware. So there was
nothing there that
10 would help to lay charges.
11 283 Q I heard your evidence
loud and clear on that, so
12 I'm just going to ask you
now, for the record,
13 prior to your laying charges
of sexual abuse of
14 children, did you rely on
the evidence of a Dr.
15 Jon Conte?
16 A No.
17 284 Q I would like to disregard
the words satanic or
18 ritual in my next questions,
I'm talking only
19 about sexual abuse of children.
20 A Right.
21 285 Q Prior to your laying
charges against any of the
22 plaintiffs did you solicit
an expert opinion
23 from anyone regarding sexual
abuse of children?
24 A Well, I would say that
there were several.
25 There was, I believe, a
medical examination of
26 the children by Dr. Joel
Yelland. Certainly I
55
1 spoke to, as I indicated
earlier, to Carol
2 Bunko-Ruys, who I considered
an expert in that
3 area, and I relied on their
opinion regarding
4 these allegations, yes.
5 286 Q When you said you relied
on Carol Bunko-Ruys
6 because she was an expert
in that area, you
7 must, then, mean she was
an expert in the area
8 of sexual abuse of children?
9 A That's right.
10 287 Q Did you rely, then,
on any written material from
11 Carol Bunko-Ruys in that
regard?
12 A No.
13 288 Q Did you attached to
any documents you may have
14 given the prosecutor any
written opinion of a
15 Carol Bunko-Ruys?
16 A No.
17 289 Q Did you attach the
opinion of any other person,
18 such as the opinion of Liz
Newton, regarding the
19 sexual abuse of the Ross
children?
20 A No. As I recall the only
documents that were
21 attached were the medical
exams of Dr. Joel
22 Yelland.
23 290 Q As you went through
the interviews with the
24 children you must have determined
that there was
25 an issue of the credibility
of the children
26 that's going to arise, that
is, whether they
56
1 were going to be believed;
is that correct?
2 A In any of those cases,
yes.
3 291 Q Yes. And that's what
you're saying, as a member
4 of the morality department
you dealt with
5 children on a daily basis?
6 MR. GERRAND: He hasn't said
that he was a
7 member of the morality department.
8 A Youth Section.
9 292 Q MR. BORDEN: I'm sorry,
the Youth Section, all
10 right. And in relation to
being a member of the
11 Youth Section you would
have dealt with
12 children?
13 A That's right.
14 293 Q And it's always a
question of whether the
15 children should be believed?
16 A I believe in -- if I can
state this -- in 1990
17 the police relied very much
on the fact that all
18 child experts, if we can
call them that, social
19 workers, therapists everywhere
told us that
20 children did not lie about
things like this.
21 And that's certainly advice
that we took from
22 them.
23 294 Q You had been a member
of the Youth Division of
24 the police service for about
a year and a half
25 before charges were laid;
is that correct?
26 A That's correct.
57
1 295 Q And during that period
of time it became almost
2 philosophical that as it
relates to sexual abuse
3 children do not lie. Would
you say that would
4 be the --
5 A I wouldn't say it was philosophical.
What I was
6 saying is that's what we
kept hearing from the
7 experts, from the social
workers, from the
8 therapists, that children
don't lie.
9 296 Q You must have reached
a point where you, then,
10 believed in that premise,
that as it relates to
11 sexual abuse children don't
lie?
12 A I would suggest that certainly
I would take that
13 premise into consideration,
but I can't say that
14 I totally ever believed
it.
15 297 Q All right, fine. Since
you didn't totally
16 believe it you were able,
then, to interview
17 three children, Michael
Ross, Kathy Ross,
18 Michelle Ross, and there
were some pretty
19 bizarre allegations that
they made -- am I
20 correct in asserting that
they were pretty
21 bizarre allegations at times?
22 A Yes, I would say so.
23 298 Q And since you didn't
really completely believe
24 that children don't lie
and you knew credibility
25 would come into issue, did
you solicit the
26 advice of any other expert
as it relates to
58
1 credibility matters?
2 A Other than those that I've
named?
3 299 Q Yes.
4 A No.
5 300 Q All right. And because
it's credibility issues
6 and you didn't totally believe
children don't
7 lie, then you would want
at least a written
8 report, I would assume, from
one of these
9 experts. Carol Bunko-Ruys,
did you get one from
10 her?
11 A No.
12 301 Q Did she ever tell
you that children don't lie?
13 A I don't recall her specifically
saying that, but
14 certainly that was the talk.
You know, I want
15 to qualify that, as well,
when you talked about
16 bizarre behaviours. I think
that children can
17 also be made to believe
that some of these
18 things were being done or
happening. When we
19 talk about the Ross children,
they were four and
20 six years old, or three
and five at that time,
21 and much, much younger when
they were in their
22 own birth home. And I certainly
am open to the
23 fact or recognize that children
can be made to
24 believe that something like
this is going on.
25 302 Q All right. What you're
saying, then, is that
26 children don't outright
lie of their own
59
1 volition, that they may believe
in the very
2 things they say?
3 A That's right.
4 303 Q And that may have been
happening in relation to
5 Michael, Kathy and Michelle
in the interviews in
6 October and November of 1990?
7 A I wouldn't say in all of
them because, again, we
8 relied on physical evidence
there as well.
9 304 Q If I can just take
you back, then, to this area
10 of children don't lie, and
that premise. Did
11 you receive an opinion from
Carol Bunko-Ruys
12 that these children, Michael,
Michelle and
13 Kathy, were telling the
truth?
14 A Yes, I believe I did.
15 305 Q All right. And when
you received that
16 information that they were
telling the truth,
17 did you put that to writing?
18 A When I received the opinion
from her?
19 306 Q Yes.
20 A Well, other than the occurrence
reports, no.
21 307 Q So that when she said,
as your expert, as part
22 of the loosely-knit team,
the children are
23 telling the truth, you must
have put that down
24 in an occurrence report
or some other memorandum
25 somewhere?
26 MR. GERRAND: He didn't say
that.
60
1 MR. BORDEN: He didn't say
what? I'm sorry.
2 MR. GERRAND: He didn't say
that he put the
3 verbal statement of Bunko-Ruys
into a report.
4 He said whatever he put was
put into the report
5 and he specifically said
he wasn't certain if
6 that had been put into the
report.
7 MR. BORDEN: All right, fine,
Mr. Gerrand.
8 Then, I guess, all we have
to do is look at the
9 report and we'll find that
answer there, that's
10 what you're saying. Am I
correct?
11 MR. GERRAND: That's his
evidence.
12 MR. BORDEN: That's his evidence,
all right.
13 308 Q So now, you may or
may not have put in a report
14 to Mr. Miazga the opinion
of Carol Bunko-Ruys.
15 Did you see, when we gave
you time to review
16 your documents --
17 A I didn't review that whole
document, no.
18 MR. BORDEN: All right. Let's
have that
19 marked, then, we'll have
it marked as our first
20 exhibit today. And that
is the whole book of
21 documents, if you don't
mind, which would be --
22 MR. GERRAND: Well, I do
mind.
23 MR. BORDEN: Which would
be 531(a) through
24 610.
25 MR. GERRAND: Just a minute,
please. There are
26 other documents attached
to that that were, in
61
1 the witness's evidence, likely
not part of the
2 material that was provided
to the prosecutors in
3 the spring of 1991; is that
correct??
4 A That's right.
5 MR. BORDEN: And that's fine.
I think that
6 what we could do is just
mark as Exhibit P-1
7 those documents, 531(a) to
610.
8 MR. GERRAND: Sure.
9 MR. BORDEN: And then the
blue sheets which
10 are at the back of that
document, P-1, we will
11 disregard.
12 EXHIBIT P-1: FILE PROVIDED
TO PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE IN THE
13 SPRING OF 1991, COMPRISING
DEFENDANTS' DOCUMENTS 531(a) TO
14 610 (NOT INCLUDING ATTACHED
BLUE SHEETS)
15 309 Q We had been talking
about the credibility of the
16 children and there was a
point where we talked
17 about bizarre allegations.
Now what is bizarre
18 to me may not be bizarre
to you. But there must
19 have been a point when,
in the interviews, you
20 said some of these allegations
of the children
21 just don't make a lot of
sense. Was there a
22 point?
23 A No, I don't believe I
ever thought that. I
24 really felt that these children
had experienced
25 this in some way. Whether
the acts had actually
26 happened -- and here I'm
talking specifically
62
1 about the allegations against
their birth
2 parents and Donald White.
3 310 Q Yes.
4 A At no time in the interviews
did I ever believe
5 that the allegations they
made against your
6 plaintiffs, or did I ever
doubt that they
7 weren't real, that they weren't
true.
8 311 Q All right.
9 A Against White and the Rosses,
certainly you had
10 to have a look at that.
But I believed that --
11 I always believed that the
children had
12 experienced something that
made them believe, at
13 least, that this event had
occurred.
14 312 Q There were allegations
of cutting up of babies?
15 A Right.
16 313 Q And was that always
in relation to the natural
17 parents or the Ross parents?
18 A That's right.
19 314 Q And there was also
this idea of eating bats;
20 same?
21 A Right.
22 315 Q The idea of eating
eyeballs?
23 A Right.
24 316 Q There was the drinking
of blood?
25 A That's right.
26 317 Q Was that also in relation
to the natural
63
1 parents?
2 A Only to them, yes.
3 318 Q And in relation to
the cutting up or the
4 bruising of the children,
was that in relation
5 to the Ross children?
6 A As I recall it was only
to them.
7 319 Q And to the Ross parents?
8 A Right.
9 320 Q So that when we're
talking about all of these
10 allegations of babies and
blood, all of that, in
11 your judgment related to
a different time, not
12 the time that they resided
with the Klassens?
13 A Well, as I recall it.
Again, it's all in the
14 transcripts of the interviews.
15 321 Q But as you recall
things today?
16 A That's right.
17 322 Q When it came to actual
physical wounds to any of
18 the children, was it your
belief that all those
19 had occurred at a former
time, not when the
20 children resided with my
clients?
21 A The allegation of being
wounded?
22 323 Q Yes.
23 A Yes, I believe it did,
yeah.
24 324 Q So that at the end
of the day and having regard
25 to these interviews of October-November
of 1990,
26 was there a period of time
when you thought,
64
1 well, they may have been
abused by the Klassens
2 but nothing else happened
other than the sexual
3 abuse itself? I mean, be
clear, you never
4 believed that there was the
cutting up of babies
5 at the Klassen houses?
6 A No, I did not.
7 325 Q Or any of these allegations
of devil worship?
8 A No.
9 326 Q Of drinking of blood?
10 A No.
11 327 Q Of eating of faeces?
12 A No.
13 328 Q Of killing of dogs?
14 A No.
15 329 Q Was there ever a time
when you believed that at
16 the Klassen and Kvello home
there was sexual
17 abuse to a dog?
18 A I don't recall. I don't
believe so, but I don't
19 recall.
20 330 Q All right, so your
evidence today is you don't
21 believe so?
22 MR. GERRAND: No, his evidence
was he didn't
23 believe so and he didn't
recall.
24 331 Q MR. BORDEN: Yes, all
right. So you don't
25 recall whether there was
any scenario involving
26 sexual abuse to or involving
sexual activities
65
1 with a dog?
2 A I don't recall.
3 332 Q All right.
4 A We're talking here specifically
in the Klassen-
5 Kvello homes?
6 333 Q Right.
7 A No, I don't recall.
8 334 Q I think it would be
fair to say, then, and I'm
9 taking this from what you're
saying today, that
10 when it comes to any one
of the plaintiffs you
11 believed there was sexual
abuse?
12 A That's right.
13 335 Q But the sexual abuse
was sort of one-on-one, and
14 that is, Diane with one
of the children?
15 A That's what was disclosed,
yes.
16 336 Q Rick with another
one of the children; is that
17 correct?
18 A That's right.
19 337 Q But from your recollection,
there was no other
20 activity that took place
during the sexual acts,
21 in other words, the taking
of pictures or the
22 consuming of blood or other
intoxicants?
23 A No, I think the children
indicated there was
24 some taking of pictures
in some of the homes, in
25 your plaintiffs' homes.
I don't recall exactly
26 which ones but, again, they're
in the
66
1 transcripts.
2 338 Q Sure. So what you're
saying, then, is there
3 might have been the taking
of pictures as you
4 recall today, but not any
of these other things
5 that may have occurred at
the Ross house, the
6 drinking of blood?
7 A Not the drinking of blood,
no.
8 339 Q Not the killing of
babies?
9 A Right.
10 340 Q Not the eating of
bats?
11 A Right.
12 341 Q Or anything like that?
13 A That's right.
14 342 Q Now is there anything,
in your evidence today,
15 that you regard as really
bizarre, I mean
16 something that happened
at the Kvello or Klassen
17 home that was just really
outlandish, it just
18 didn't fit?
19 A No, not that I recall.
20 343 Q I mean it was bad
enough you thought there was
21 sexual acts going on with
these people and these
22 children; right?
23 A I agree with that.
24 344 Q But there wasn't anything
beyond the sexual
25 acts?
26 A I would suggest that's
enough. But, yeah.
67
1 345 Q Sure, I give you that
much.
2 A Yeah.
3 346 Q You said that there
were pictures that may have
4 been taken?
5 A The children, I believe
they alleged some
6 pictures being taken at some
of the homes, I
7 don't recall specifically
which ones.
8 347 Q Right. Now, in all
of your investigation of the
9 Klassens and Kvellos, my
clients, my plaintiffs,
10 did you find any pictures?
11 A We never searched any
of the homes.
12 348 Q Did you find any pictures,
whether you searched
13 or not, did anyone give
you any pictures?
14 A No.
15 349 Q Did you see any pictures
involving any of these
16 sexual acts?
17 A No.
18 350 Q Did you see any pictures
which depicted anyone
19 of the plaintiffs with the
children?
20 A No.
21 351 Q Did you see them in
pictures involving birthday
22 parties?
23 A No, I never saw any pictures
of them with any of
24 the plaintiffs.
25 352 Q Did you see any video
of the Klassens with these
26 children? >
> >
|
