Judge covers innumerable crimes committed by Police, Crown and Social Workers
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
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.
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
Muzzling the Media
There is a long and dishonourable
history of court ordered gag orders on this case which was the
subject of a 1999 feature by Dan
Zakreski (he changed the names to get around MacPherson's
order) has now been covered by CBC's
Fifth Estate (2000), winning all the major broadcast awards
in Canada for a full length feature which disclosed the names
and brought the story to the entire country.
2002: The StarPhoenix
has run a feature which continues
to keep the story in the public eye but is unreasonably restricted
in what it is allowed to tell. Jason Warick, the writer of this
feature had prepared another series of articles which was scheduled
for publication last spring but was not run for what injusticebusters understand to be legal reasons.
Reporting on a civil case (in
this case, the $10M lawsuit)
is different from reporting on a criminal case (Brian
Dueck's arrest of and Saskatoon Crown
Prosecutors' charges against sixteen innocent people in 1991).
Putting the cover on dis"cover"y
The restrictions on the civil
case would be laughable if they did not have such serious implications.
The Rules of Court which limit discussion of material discovered
during a civil claim exist to protect corporations and businesses
from having their "trade secrets" unfairly divulged
Every aspect of Foster Parent
case, involving charges of violent sexual abuse of children,
is in the public interest and should be in the public domain.
In today's StarPhoenix article, Don McKillop continues
to imply he believes the Klassens and Kvellos are child molesters
in order to justify his continued defence of the prosecutors,
cop and social workers in the $10M lawsuit. Dueck says he would
really like to tell the "real" story but he is bound
by lawyer's orders, again, implying that he is something other
than a manufacturer of evidence to charge innocent people.
Judge MacPherson's Gag order
- The Honourable Donald K. MacPherson
- Chief Justice, Court of Queen's Bench
- Court House, 2425 Victoria Avenue,
- Regina, Saskatchewan
March 29, 1993
- MacDermid Lamarsh
- Barristers & Solicitors
- 905 - 201 - 21st St. East
- SASKATOON, Saskatchewan
- S7K 0B8
Attention: Anne M. Wallace
Dear Ms. Wallace:
Re: Queen v. Klassen et al. - Preliminary Inquiry Transcripts
Your letter of February 15,
1993, has been referred to me for attention and reply, and I
apologize for the delay in responding.
As I understand the situation,
following the preliminary hearing of 11 accused persons in this
matter, Mr. Peter Klassen, after the appropriate election, entered
a plea of guilty to certain charges whereupon the Crown entered
a stay of proceedings in respect of the other accused persons,
and that is the way the matter stands at the present time.
I see several problems in releasing
to the public, or a member thereof, a copy of the transcript
of the preliminary hearing at this time:
(1) At the outset of the preliminary
hearing, the court, on application by defence counsel, made an
order under s. 539(1) of the Criminal Code prohibiting
the publication by broadcast or newspaper until the accused parties
have been discharged, or until the trial has ended if the accused
are committed. Neither of these events has occurred. The transcript
does not indicate there was any limitations as to the application
of this order as suggested in your letter.
(2) Further, the court at the
outset also made an order pursuant to 486(3) in respect of all
the complainants and witnesses involved in all the informations.
That order remains in effect.
(3) While it rarely happens,
still, under the Criminal Code s579(2) it is open to the
Crown to recommence the proceeding within the time limited by
that section. If that should occur with a jury trial or trials
being the result, the publication of the testimony given at the
preliminary hearing could have an unfavourable affect on the
minds of potential jurors. While this factor was not considered
in either the MacIntyre case o[r] the Vickery case,
I feel it is a sound reason for refusing the release of those
transcripts at the present time.
(4) You are aware that in Vickery,
the Supreme Court of Canada held that public documents in the
possession of the Court should be made available to the public
except, inter alia, in situations where it is necessary
to "protect the innocent". In my view, those "child
complainants" and other young persons who testified at the
preliminary, fall within the classification of "innocent
persons" and I am satisfied that publication of their testimony,
either now or in the future, could cause them great and undeserved
embarrassment and anguish, and for this reason as well the transcript
should not be released.
Based on the foregoing, I have
ordered the local registrar of the Judicial Centre of Saskatoon
to refuse to release the transcript.
I should add that I, and I
believe the other members of this court, support the views as
expressed by the then Chief Justice Dickson in Vickery,
but I am of the view that the foregoing reasons are sufficiently
compelling to refuse release of the transcripts.
I would add as well that later
in the course of the preliminary hearing, the court did make
an order under s. 486(1), presumably in the interest of "the
proper administration of justice", excluding members of
the public from the courtroom, and a further order under s. 486(2.1)
that the child witnesses be screened from the accused persons.
However, I do not view these orders as affecting my instruction
that the transcript not be released.
(signed) D. K. MacPherson
Publisher: Sheila Steele 1943-2006
• Index to injustice stories on this site
- Injusticebusters court advice:
- How to walk yourself through the justice system
- Why you should dump your preliminary hearing (written July 1998 and still valid)
- Sheila Steele Editorial: The Naked Truth --
Another target of Dueck's malice: Wilf Hathway
Index to Saskatoon Police stories
Good scrapbook for 1998-2002 period
- The Klassen/Kvello civil Trial
- September 8, 2003: Trial Begins
- September 9, 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 02, 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: Brian 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 | Page 2 | Page 3
- 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
- Sarah Gibb's profile of Richard and Kari Klassen
- Lives ruined by Jason Warick Feb. 19
- Judge Baynton warns defendants' lawyers not to delay damages trial April 15/04
- Dueck drops his appeal
- Full transcript of Dueck's examinations for discovery which were part of the read-ins at the civil trial
4 YEARS FOR NOTHING
Peter Klassen: served 4 years for crimes he didn't commit nor ever happened!
Michael Ross and Peter Klassen filed a joint claim against Saskatchewan officials