injusticebusters logo

About libel and malice

Editorial: March 25, 2003

. . .Through a two-way looking glass
You see your alice. . .

. . .Charged with insults and flattery
Her body moves with malice
Do you have to be so cruel to be callous . . . (From Beyond Belief, Elvis Costello)

A few years ago, and probably still displayed at the top of some of these pages, inJusticebusters claimed to be experts on defamation. Since that time I would acknowledge that there are probably several people and groups out there who are more expert on this topic than we are.

Brian Dueck

On the question of defamation and Brian Dueck, there is probably no one who knows more than we do. He lost in his efforts to criminally prosecute me, Rob Klassen and Richard Klassen in 1994. The fact that he was able to instigate criminal charges against us from his position as Saskatoon Police sergeant at the same time he was facing civil allegations in a lawsuit launched by Richard Klassen remains an act of malfeasance for which he has not yet been held to account.

Malfeasance is the abuse of one's office to commit a crime. This crime, in the case of a cop, is called operating under colour of law. I allege Brian Dueck is guilty of it and I also allege Winnipeg cop Loren Schinkel is guilty of manufacturing evidence in the case of Monique Turenne.

Brian Dueck, who is now the ranking superintendent in the Saskatoon Police, has wisely backed off in pushing his charges of defamation. In the lawsuit against him and others, Don McKillop, the government lawyer acting on behalf of the others is pressing ahead with a defamation counterclaim against Klassen.

This would have to be based on the fact that the plaintiffs in QB 271 (1995) have alleged that the prosecution team of Richard Quinney, Matt Miazga and Sonja Hansen pressed forward with charges against the plaintiffs of gross child sexual abuse knowing that the charges were preposterous. In other words they knew that Dueck had manufactured his case and pushed their case to court just the same. When prosecutors do this, it is called malicious prosecution. In recent years a few prosecutors have been nailed for this; at the time of this particular piece of ugliness, Richard Quinney bragged to anyone who would listen and was quoted in the Saskatoon StarPhoenix as saying such a case had never been won.

McKillop has not been fazed by the recent court trends to frown on malicious prosecutors. He has been quite prepared to commit malfeasance himself. The debacle over the state of his files was the subject of some discussion in court, in the newspapers and on these pages last year. He had previously attempted to have Klassen's claim in the lawsuit thrown out because of alleged violations of the Rules of Court on this website. His snitty response to losing has been to up the price per page for photocopying the materials his office is obliged to provide Klassen in the discovery process. Is that malice or malfeasance or both? Mature it is not.

Michael, Michelle and Kathy Ross were disturbed, disadvantaged fetal-alcohol damaged pre-adolescents when Dueck, Bunko-Ruys, Quinney, Miazga and Hansen tricked them into making accusations against people to whom they have all now apologized. Thousands and thousands of dollars were spent, from the cost of the Thompson "special needs home" to therapy money for Carol Bunko-Ruys to salaries for court workers to prep and accompany them.

When the cases finally fell apart and charges were stayed, the Ross children were cynically used once more. The proclamation that the children were "too traumatized" carried with it a subtext that the government cared about them and was taking care of them. In fact it was only taking care to keep them separated so they couldn't compare notes about how they had been tricked and then to starve and manipulate them again. Add callous to malice. Of all the money that has been spent to use these kids and then cover up that use, precious little has been given to them. They continue to have to struggle for every penny they get from Social Services -- cheques which no one is able to live on, as demonstrated by the numbers of petty criminals on welfare traipsing through the courts each day -- and receive no meaningful counselling for their traumatization. Traumatized they are but not by the Klassens and Kvelloes.

Peter Klassen spent four years in Bowden penitentiary for crimes manufactured by the defendants in the lawsuit. He is illiterate. He is not a plaintiff in the claim. A lawsuit he filed along with Michael was turfed last year because the pleadings were not correctly formed.

McKillop has now stated in open court that he intends to pursue his clients' counter-claim of defamation against Richard Klassen while dropping it against the other plaintiffs. He must be doing this because he believes he has a reasonable chance of succeeding, the last of the prerequesites for a government lawyer to proceed with any claim. There is no evidence and no case. Keeping that counter-claim alive is just another way for the government to intimidate Richard Klassen. By stating his intention to proceed in front of a Queen's Bench judge, McKillop is insinuating to the public that he knows something that they don't.

What could he possibly know that is not already public knowledge? That several of us postered and demonstrated to bring this case to public attention in 1994? That John and Johanna Lucas were convicted of defamation (against Dueck) and that Richard and I were acquitted of similar charges? That we all implicated Quinney, Miazga, Hansen and Bunko-Ruys as accomplices in Dueck's crimes against the Ross children? That they have engaged forensic laboratories in countless hours of reconstructing posters scraped from poles and looking for fingerprints that might somehow tie Richard Klassen to some of the more "stark" presentations of the truth?

The Ross children, now young adults, have all recanted on national television. Almost a year has elapsed since the last showing of the last Fifth Estate update. We all know that the even the most gripping of stories recede in memory so I am once again bringing some of these matters to the forefront. Mark the month of September on your calendar for the trial in QB 271.
--Sheila Steele, March 25, 2003

Update: September 2004 (John Lucas is charged with having defamed QB Judge Paul Hrabinsky, Rent-a-crown lawyer Rod Donlevy and malicious cop Brian Dueck)

On January 8, 2004, Saskatoon Queen's Bench Judge Larry Kyle imposed the following conditions on John Lucas:

1. To keep the peace and be of good behaviour.

2. Appear in Court when required to do so.

3. Have no contact directly or indirectly with Justice Paul Hrabinsky.

4. Have no contact directly or indirectly with any Judge or any Court in the Province of Saskatchewan unless required by law.

5. Not phone or contact the offices of any Court in the Province of Saskatchewan unless required by law.

6. Have no contact with Rod Donlevy or with anyone associated with his place of employment either directly or indirectly.

7. Not to publish or cause to be published in any format including electronic format, nor to distribute or cause to be distributed or displayed any material referring to Justice Paul Hrabinsky or any Judge or Justice of any Court in Saskatchewan without the express written permission of this Court.

8. Not to publish or cause to be published in any format including electronic format, nor to distribute or cause to be distributed or displayed any material referring to Rod Donlevy or any other member or past member of the Law Society of Saskatchewan without the express written permission of this Court.

9. Not to publish or cause to be published in any format including electronic format, nor to distribute or cause to be distributed or displayed any material referring to Brian Dueck or any other member or past member of any police force without the express written permission of this Court.

10. Not to place any poster in any public place without the express written permission of this Court.

11. Not to be in the City of Saskatoon, Saskatchewan except for Court appearances or for medical appointments with consent of the Crown. ( "or for the purposes of meeting with counsel or prospective counsel" AMENDED BY JUSTICE G. N. ALLBRIGHT THIS 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2004 . )

12. Not to communicate in any way on a website or e-mail with anyone regarding his Court case, or anything that pertains to child sex abuse in the Province of Saskatchewan. He can download but he can't upload information on his computer in relation to these matters.

13. The following was designated # 13 by the accused, John David Lucas

On July 6th, 2004, The Honourable Chief justice W. F. Gerein, varied the above ORDER with the following;

"Order that the Undertaking is Amended by adding that Mr. Lucas may attend at any time in the City of Saskatoon for the purpose of visiting his wife at the Royal University Hospital while she is having to renam there as well as to accompany her to any consequent medical appointments"