1 2 3 IPPERWASH PUBLIC INQUIRY 4 5 6 7 ******************** 8 9 10 BEFORE: THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE SIDNEY LINDEN, 11 COMMISSIONER 12 13 14 15 16 Held at: Forest Community Centre 17 Kimball Hall 18 Forest, Ontario 19 20 21 ******************** 22 23 24 February 23rd, 2005 25

2
  1                        Appearances
  2  Derry Millar      )             Commission Counsel
  3  Susan Vella        )    (np)
  4  Donald Worme, Q.C. )
  5  Katherine Hensel  )
  6  Jodie-Lynn Waddilove)   (np)
  7  
  8  Murray Klippenstein )            The Estate of Dudley 
  9  Vilko Zbogar       )  (np)      George and George
 10  Andrew Orkin       )            Family Group
 11  Basil Alexander    ) (np)       (Student-at-law)
 12  
 13  Peter Rosenthal  )              Aazhoodena and George
 14  Jackie Esmonde   )              Family Group
 15  
 16  Anthony Ross     )   (np)       Residents of 
 17  Kevin Scullion   )              Aazhoodena (Army Camp)
 18  
 19  William Henderson )   (np)       Kettle Point & Stoney
 20  Jonathon George  )              Point First Nation
 21  
 22  Kim Twohig       )   (np)       Government of Ontario
 23  Walter Myrka     )   (np)
 24  Sue Freeborn     )   (np)
 25  Michelle Pong    )

3
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd)
  2  Janet Clermont   )   (np)       Municipality of 
  3  David Nash       )              Lambton Shores
  4  
  5  Peter Downard    )              The Honourable Michael
  6  Bill Hourigan    )              Harris
  7  Jennifer McAleer )
  8  
  9  Nancy Spies      )   (Np)       Robert Runciman
 10  Alice Mrozek     )   (Np)
 11  
 12  Harvey Stosberg  )   (np)       Charles Harnick
 13  Jacqueline Horvat )   (np)
 14  
 15  Douglas Sulman, Q.C. )           Marcel Beaubien
 16  Trevor Hinnegan     ) (np)
 17  
 18  Mark Sandler       ) (np)       Ontario Provincial 
 19  Andrea Tuck-Jackson )            Ontario Provincial Police
 20  Leslie Kaufman     )  (np)
 21  Peter West         ) (np)
 22  Nagai On Young     )
 23  
 24  
 25

4
  1                   APPEARANCES (cont'd)
  2  Ian Roland       )   (np)       Ontario Provincial 
  3  Karen Jones      )              Police Association &
  4  Debra Newell     )              K. Deane
  5  Ian McGilp       )   (np)
  6  Annie Leeks      )   (np)
  7  
  8  Julian Falconer  )   (np)       Aboriginal Legal 
  9  Brian Eyolfson   )              Services of Toronto
 10  Julian Roy       )   (np)
 11  
 12  Al J.C. O'Marra  )              Office of the Chief
 13  Robert Ash, Q.C.  )   (np)       Coroner
 14  
 15  William Horton   )   (np)       Chiefs of Ontario
 16  Matthew Horner   )
 17  Kathleen Lickers )   (Np)
 18  Mark Frederick   )   (np)       Christopher Hodgson
 19  Erin Tully       )
 20  Craig Mills      )   (np)
 21  Megan Mackey     )   (np)
 22  David Roebuck    )   (Np)       Debbie Hutton
 23  Anna Perschy     )   (np)
 24  Melissa Panjer   )
 25  Danya Cohen-Nehemia ) (np)

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 PAGE NO. 3 Discussion 6 4 5 WALLACE GREGORY KACZANOWSKI, Sworn 6 7 Examination-In-Chief by Ms. Katherine Hensel 47 8 Cross-Examination by Mr. Andrew Orkin 111 9 Cross-Examination by Ms. Jackie Esmonde 120 10 Cross-Examination by Mr. Kevin Scullion 130 11 Cross-Examination by Mr. Jonathan George 144 12 Cross-Examination by Ms. Andrea Tuck-Jackson 149 13 Cross-Examination by Ms. Karen Jones 174 14 Cross-Examination by Ms. Jennifer McAleer 192 15 Re-Direct Examination by Ms. Katherine Hensel 195 16 17 MILES CHARLES BRESSETTE, Sworn: 18 Examination-In-Chief by Ms. Katherine Hensel 197 19 20 Certificate of Transcript 258 21 22 23 24 25

1 --- Upon commencing at 9:00 a.m. 2 3 THE REGISTRAR: This Public Inquiry is 4 now in session, the Honourable Mr. Justice Linden 5 presiding. Please be seated. 6 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Good morning, 7 Commissioner. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 9 morning. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: The first order of 11 business today is to deal with a request that has been 12 made by Mr. Maynard Sam George and the request that's 13 been made by Mr. George is to have his testimony heard in 14 Toronto and the reasons advanced by Mr. George in his 15 letter to me are as follows and I quote from his letter: 16 "For one, Toronto is where I believe 17 the Ipperwash shooting of my brother 18 originated. That is where then Premier 19 Harris of Ontario said this Government 20 treats aboriginals and non-aboriginals 21 the same." 22 And quotes in brackets: 23 "regardless of the treaty between our 24 peoples." 25 Closed bracket and that he, quote:

7
  1                   "Wants him out (of the Park, namely our
  2                   treaty lands) in a day or two.
  3                   For another, Toronto is closest to the
  4                   eyes and ears of the broad Ontario
  5                   public (sometimes in the form of the
  6                   media), a public who will need to
  7                   understand and give some support to the
  8                   Commission's work and recommendations
  9                   if they are to make a difference.
 10                   Thirdly, the public all across Ontario
 11                   and the rest of Canada have a personal
 12                   stake in this issue because they are
 13                   the people who ultimately will be
 14                   affected if political pressure on
 15                   police to use force against legitimate
 16                   protestors is tolerated in this society
 17                   and the great majority of that same
 18                   public is either in Toronto or accesses
 19                   a media that is based in Toronto.
 20                   Fourthly, Toronto is closest to the
 21                   present decision makers who will decide
 22                   whether to do anything about the
 23                   evidence and report from this
 24                   Commission."
 25                 With respect to the issue of the

1 authority, with respect to the location of the Hearings, 2 Rule 2, as you know, provides you with the absolute 3 authority to designate location of the Hearings. The 4 rule states: 5 "Public hearings will be convened in 6 the Ipperwash area at Forest in the 7 Community Centre (Kimball Hall) and in 8 Toronto at the Commission Hearing Room 9 and such other locations as the 10 Commission designates to address issues 11 related to Part 1 of the Inquiry." 12 This is a public inquiry, not a trial. 13 The technical rules of venue do not govern your 14 procedural decisions on where the testimony of a 15 particular Witness is to be heard. You have an absolute 16 discretion to determine the location of the Hearings and 17 with that, where a Witness will be heard. 18 On July 13th, 2004, you stated as follows: 19 "I have determined that Forest should 20 be the primary location for these 21 Hearings based on the principle that an 22 Inquiry of this kind should be held in 23 the location where a substantial part 24 of the events in question occurred. 25 In my view, physical proximity

1 heightens one's awareness of and 2 appreciation for the events in 3 question. It also better insures that 4 the Inquiry is readily accessible to a 5 majority of those who are most affected 6 by those events." 7 While you determine that the bulk of the 8 Hearings would be held in Forest, you left it open the 9 witnesses to be heard in other locations. When we 10 received this request you directed me to canvass the 11 other parties with respect to Mr. Sam George's request as 12 you wished to have the matter dealt with in public. 13 We have done that. Some parties support 14 the request including the chiefs of Ontario and 15 Aboriginal Legal Services of Toronto. The residents of 16 Aazhoodena support the request but do not agree or accept 17 all of the reasons advanced. 18 The Government of Ontario does not object 19 to the request but again, does not accept or agree with 20 the reasons advanced by Mr. George. As I understand it, 21 Mr. Harris and Mr. Hodgson do not object to Mr. George 22 testifying in Toronto but again, do not agree with nor 23 accept the reasons advanced by Mr. George. 24 The OPP, the Chippewa of Kettle and Stony 25 Point First Nation, the coroner of Ontario also take no

1 position either for or against. As I understand it, the 2 Municipality of Lambton Shores does not object -- takes 3 no position but as you will hear from Mr. Nash that the 4 decision should be made on one of principle. 5 Counsel for Mr. Harnick takes no position 6 but shares the concerns raised by Counsel for Mr. Harris. 7 And that's -- the concern is with respect to the reasons. 8 As I understand it, the OPPA, Mr. Beaubien and the 9 Aazhoodena and George Family Group are opposed to the 10 request. 11 Mr. Runciman and Ms. Hutton have an 12 objection, the main basis of the objection of Counsel for 13 Messrs. Runciman and Ms. Hutton as I understand it is 14 that by, and it's really the same as Mr. Harris, is that 15 by agreeing to the request, the Commission is somehow 16 agreeing with the reasons put forth in Mr. Sam George's 17 letter dated February 15, 2005. 18 I have provided you with copy of the 19 submissions of Ms. Spies on behalf of Mr. Runciman who 20 could not be here today. Commission Counsel recommends 21 that you agree to the request of Mr. George but without 22 commenting on the merits of the reasons set out in Mr. 23 George's letter. 24 Many of those reasons are subject of hotly 25 contested factual disputes which will be the subject of

1 findings of fact at the end of these Hearings. Simply 2 put, it is premature to consider the merits of the 3 reasons advanced by Mr. George given their dependence on 4 factual findings and in particular, reason number 1. 5 Commission counsel recommends that Mr. Maynard Sam 6 George's testimony be and heard in Toronto as he requests 7 for the following reasons. 8 First, out of respect for Mr. Maynard Sam 9 George in his personal capacity and as a representative 10 of the estate of the late Dudley George. 11 Second, Mr. Maynard Sam George has been of 12 great assistance to the Commission since this Commission 13 was called. His assistance has been invaluable to the 14 work of the Commission. 15 Thirdly, there are not sufficiently 16 compelling reasons not to allow Mr. George to have his 17 testimony heard in Toronto. 18 The involvement of Mr. Sam George in the 19 events surrounding the death of his brother principally 20 revolved around his involvement after the fatal shootings 21 and that's the evidence that will be calling. 22 Mr. George has been in attendance at 23 virtually all days of the Hearing. And it's -- it's 24 important to remember that since the Inquiry was created, 25 Mr. George has been of the view that a portion of the

1 Inquiry should be in Toronto and a portion here and that 2 as I recall his position from the beginning was he wanted 3 to testify in Toronto. 4 We recognize that Mr. Clifford George has 5 been in attendance at virtually all of the days of the 6 Hearing except when he was unable to attend due to 7 illness. Apart from the lawyers and Commission staff, 8 Mr. Clifford George and Mr. Sam George have been the 9 persons who have been in attendance the most. 10 If you decide that you agree to Mr. 11 George's request, we would make arrangements to have the 12 testimony recorded so that Mr. Clifford George and others 13 will have to opportunity to see and hear the evidence of 14 Mr. George in a timely fashion. The transcript will also 15 be posted as usual on our website. 16 It is noted we received in response to the 17 request to the circulation of the request to the Parties, 18 a number of expressions of concern by the Parties 19 regarding Mr. George's request and the reasons for their 20 concern. 21 As I stated in an e-mail to Counsel for 22 Mr. Harris, Mr. Downard, dated February 17th and 23 circulated to all Counsel, and I reiterate today that the 24 concerns are not justified, in particular, I stated in my 25 e-mail:

1 "With respect to the matters raised in 2 your letter we wish to draw your 3 attention to the following: 4 1. One must remember that there is a 5 difference between the Commissioner and 6 Commission Counsel. The decision as to 7 whether the testimony of Mr. George 8 will be heard in Toronto or Forest is 9 the decision of the Commissioner and 10 not Commission Counsel. 11 2. You said in my e-mail that we 12 intend to recommend that the testimony 13 be heard in Toronto. We also said that 14 before we make our recommendation to 15 the Commissioner, we wish to know if 16 any Party has an objection to Mr. 17 George's testimony being heard in 18 Toronto and the basis for that 19 objection. 20 3. Our e-mail dated February 16, 2005, 21 does not endorse the reasons advanced 22 by Mr. George in his letter. You 23 should not assume, nor would it be 24 correct to assume, that we accept or 25 agree with the reasons set out by Mr.

1 George in his letter. 2 4. We do not agree that by stating 3 that we intend to recommend that Mr. 4 George's testimony be heard in Toronto, 5 that a precedent is being set; this 6 request is confined to one (1) 7 individual. 8 If there are other requests, they will 9 be considered on their merits, and 10 5. We need not -- we did not mean by 11 the statement in my e-mail, quote: 12 "His efforts in September 1995 to have 13 this Public Inquiry called". Close 14 quote 15 "That we agree that the efforts made by 16 Mr. George are relevant to the mandate 17 of the Commission." Close quote. 18 The position of Commission Counsel is as I 19 stated, that we recommend that the request be granted. 20 We recommend it for the three (3) reasons that I 21 advanced. Commission Counsel does not accept, Commission 22 Counsel does not agree with the reasons advanced by Mr. 23 George. 24 The foundation of, particularly, the first 25 reason is a hotly, as I said earlier, contested fact in

1 this proceeding and one cannot make any decision based 2 about that fact today; that has to wait the -- the 3 conclusion of all of the evidence, hearing all of the 4 evidence and the findings that you make at the end. 5 We -- if you agree that the request should 6 be granted, we will have to make arrangements for a 7 Hearing Room and to determine a date in Toronto, but that 8 should not cause any undue delay. 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 10 very much, Mr. Millar. In view -- 11 MR. DERRY MILLAR: And I hope I fairly 12 stated everyone's position, as I understand it. 13 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: If you 14 haven't, we'll hear about it. 15 In view of the position taken by my 16 Counsel in this matter, it's not necessary for me to hear 17 from anybody at the moment who supports the request. 18 What I would like to hear from is anybody who opposes the 19 request at this time who wishes to make a submission. 20 Some of you I know have written a letter. 21 I have copies of those letters, but this is an 22 opportunity for the people who oppose the request to make 23 a submission. 24 We don't have any particular order, I 25 guess we can follow the same general order that we do

1 with cross-examination, so I guess, Ms. Esmonde, that 2 would make you first. 3 MS. JACKIE ESMONDE: Good morning, Mr. 4 Commissioner. 5 Now, as Mr. Millar outlined this morning, 6 a major factor in the decision to hold the Inquiry in 7 Forest was so that it could be accessible to those who 8 are most directly affected. 9 And the Aazhoodena and George Family Group 10 agreed with that decision at the time and we continue to 11 agree with it today. In fact our clients would have 12 preferred had it been possible, that this Inquiry had 13 been held at Stoney Point. 14 We agree with Mr. Sam George, that a 15 number of the key events surrounding the death of Dudley 16 George did originate in Toronto that the subject matter 17 of this Inquiry does involve events that occurred in 18 Toronto, however, in our view the place to answer for 19 that is here in Forest in the community that was directly 20 affected. 21 And we see no reason to deviate from that 22 principle here. Subject to any questions, those are all 23 my comments, thank you. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine, 25 thank you very much. I think Mr. Harris -- Mr. Downard

1 is next if you have any submission. 2 MR. PETER DOWNARD: Only briefly, sir, 3 because Commission counsel has fairly stated my position. 4 Our client wants to follow this Inquiry wherever you 5 choose to take it. And we took strong objection to the 6 reasons that Mr. George advanced in his letter and the 7 manner in which they were advanced. 8 But Commission Counsel has addressed that 9 appropriately. And so we're in your hands, sir. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 11 very much. There's nobody here on behalf of Mr. Harnick 12 or Mr. Runciman; is that correct? 13 MR. DERRY MILLAR: That's correct. But 14 Ms. Spies and you have -- 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, I have 16 her -- 17 MR. DERRY MILLAR: -- her submissions and 18 her submission is basically about the reasons -- concern 19 about the reasons but she -- as I read it she still 20 objects but it's basically because of the reasons 21 advanced by -- for the move. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Is there 23 anybody wish to make any oral submissions? 24 Counsel on behalf of Mr. Hodgson? 25 Counsel on behalf of Mr. Beaubien, Mr.

1 Sulman? 2 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Good morning, Mr. 3 Commissioner. 4 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 5 morning. 6 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: I am, as you know, 7 counsel for Marcel Beaubien who was the MPP for all the 8 citizens of the Ipperwash area during the relevant time 9 and further for eight (8) years between 1995 and October 10 of 2003 and it is for this reason that we take a somewhat 11 stronger position as the representative at the time of 12 all the people. And it's in light of his role that we're 13 going to make a somewhat lengthy submission so you have 14 that on the record. 15 While we respect Sam George as the 16 representative of his family and as a person and on a 17 personal note for me, it's having been involved in the 18 litigation for almost seven (7) years before this, 19 personal respect for Sam as -- as a person. 20 And we sympathize with he and his family's 21 loss of a loved one, but that is not what this decision 22 ought to be made -- the basis on which this decision 23 ought to be made and that's not the issue at hand. 24 It is beyond dispute that the shooting of 25 Dudley George occurred in Lambton County and it's beyond

1 dispute that Maynard Sam George resides in Lambton 2 County. And to this point there is no evidence before 3 this Inquiry that the shooting of Dudley George 4 originated anywhere other than in Lambton County; at the 5 corner -- at or near Army Camp Road and East Parkway 6 Drive in the former township of Bosanquet. 7 That is as My Friend pointed out, an issue 8 of hot debate and we've got a long way to go in the 9 evidence. And an unsubstantiated allegation of this 10 nature at this time, is not in our respectful view a 11 principled reason for changing the place for the hearing 12 of evidence to Toronto even if, and we have had some 13 evidence on this, but even if the decision to commence a 14 legal proceeding such as an application for injunction, 15 even if the decision is made in Toronto. Although, I 16 point out that the place for the actual application was 17 to be Sarnia and, in fact, was Sarnia. 18 That's not equivalent to saying that the 19 shooting originated in Toronto. So I just want to -- I 20 think that's an important issue to get out of the way and 21 I think we need some detail on that. 22 I think we can all agree that the central 23 seat of the Provincial Government is located in Toronto, 24 so, I just want to -- I think that's an important issue 25 to get out of the way and I think we need some detail on

1 that. 2 I think we can agree that the central seat 3 of the Provincial Government is located in Toronto. 4 That's not to say that there aren't provincial offices, 5 properties in this case, courts, throughout the Province, 6 sometimes even in small rural towns and that the ultimate 7 place for decision making for Provincial Government 8 matters is, at least in theory -- probably only in theory 9 -- at Queen's Park in Toronto. 10 I think it's trite to say that decisions 11 on matters such as Government spending, environmental 12 matters, operation of provincial parks, water regulation, 13 in theory, all emanate in Queen's Park. 14 Now, in the Walkerton tainted water Public 15 Inquiry the decisions for public funding reduction, 16 changes in regulation or testing of laboratories, in 17 theory again, emanated from Queen's Park and in that 18 Inquiry the Premier and Cabinet Ministers testified -- 19 they testified in Walkerton where the tragic deaths 20 occurred, where the whole community was affected, no 21 different than here. 22 The Koebel brothers who were ultimately 23 punished under the criminal law, resided in Walkerton 24 where the events occurred whether the decisions were made 25 in Queen's Park or not, whether the centre of the media

1 is in Toronto or not. The parallel between Walkerton -- 2 the Walkerton Inquiry and the particular question here is 3 clear. 4 While decisions concerning the occupation 5 of a provincially owned park would logically be made by 6 the Provincial Government and evidence that we don't yet 7 have on the record, may reveal the decisions concerning 8 the occupation of the Ipperwash -- the response to the 9 occupation and takeover of the Ipperwash Provincial Park 10 were made at Toronto at Queen's Park, I respectfully 11 suggest to you that's no different than in the Walkerton 12 case. 13 Decisions were there made in Queen's Park 14 also, but that is -- is not, in my respectful submission, 15 a reason to move the hearing of evidence to Toronto for 16 one (1) witness on the basis that the seat of Government 17 is there. 18 There has been -- and I think this is 19 important -- there has been regular attendance of the 20 Public from Lambton County and this is the area where the 21 tragedy occurred. They have regularly attended at the 22 Forest Community Centre, in fact, as My Friend pointed 23 out, Sam George has been here every day and has been 24 willing to attend here every day. 25 And it is our submission that the people

1 of Lambton County, both native and non-native which have 2 been adversely by this shooting. It's affected the 3 entire community, a much broader perspective. 4 It's not the person who resides at the 5 corner of Bay and Bloor Streets in Toronto who has the 6 same interest as those who were most directly affected 7 who reside in Lambton County. These local people have 8 been attending, as you know, Mr. Commissioner, through 9 the bad weather that we've had. 10 It isn't that there's been a sparse 11 attendance. There's been a higher attendance with 12 certain witnesses and lower with others, but there's been 13 attendance, and regular attendance and they should -- the 14 people of Lambton County, should be able to attend the 15 viva voce evidence of Sam George without having to travel 16 to Toronto or incur other expense. 17 Now, I know there's some suggestion with 18 regard to Clifford George and that's laudable, but the 19 same suggestion of video taping can work in reverse. The 20 media -- media members -- if this is about the media 21 members hearing it and I'll go on further on, on that and 22 the seat of Government, but if all they have to do is be 23 called into a room in Toronto where there can be 24 instantaneous connection and they can see exactly, I'm 25 not sure the mountain has to be moved to Mohammed when

1 Mohammed can come to the mountain. 2 We have -- this is a -- although we are in 3 rural small-town Ontario, we have become rather 4 sophisticated here. We have wireless computer services 5 here which enables members of the media to 6 instantaneously connect with their headquarters, be it on 7 Front Street in Toronto or elsewhere and in addition to 8 that technology, the television media themselves have 9 technology that allows virtual instantaneous connection 10 and I -- I won't go on much further than that, it's so 11 patently obviously, but if the CBC can broadcast from 12 remote areas like Afghanistan or Baghdad, they certainly 13 can broadcast from areas less remote like Forest or 14 Walkerton and that's what exactly is happening. 15 And if it truly is a national or 16 provincial wide interest in this matter, which is what 17 Mr. George and others submit to you and I agree with 18 that, then simply by issuing a press release and --and 19 indicating on this day Sam George will be giving 20 evidence, then the national and provincial media, if 21 there is such interest, will attend. 22 The attendance at the Walkerton Inquiry 23 wasn't every day with national media, but as people 24 attended, as Mr. Harris attended, there was certainly 25 national media there and that's only logical.

1 The media, as I would suggest, has the 2 financial ability to attend here and this is, in my 3 respectful submission, principally about media. If it's 4 truly a national interest story, they would have the self 5 interest to travel to Forest to cover Sam George's 6 testimony. They are financially better able to travel to 7 Forest than the people of Lambton to travel to Toronto. 8 And we should recognize that if My Friends 9 or if Mr. George's suggestion is correct and that the 10 coverage is newsworthy, it's in fact their job to attend 11 as opposed to the citizens of Lambton who are not being 12 paid to attend but it can because it has such impact on 13 their lives and will have ongoing impact on their lives, 14 whatever decision comes out of this. 15 If the place of Hearing, sir, would be 16 changed on the basis of one (1) witness's request when I 17 respectfully suggest to you, all, recognizing this isn't 18 court of law, but recognizing that all indicia of a 19 convenient forum is here in Lambton County then to be 20 fair to all witnesses, they should have a right to elect 21 a place where they wish to give their evidence. 22 And -- and I suggest that can only lead to 23 chaos. While we respect -- we may respect Sam George and 24 agree that he's an important person, he has an important 25 concern here, so do others -- so, do others, such as the

1 family members, other family members who are not as 2 supportive as you've heard, local citizens and those 3 whose reputations have been sullied by innuendo. 4 And to be fair to all, and I believe 5 that's what this Commission's approach is and to be 6 balanced, then all should be treated equally. Should any 7 witness then be entitled to elect the location for their 8 testimony? I think that would be inappropriate and I 9 think it's inappropriate here. 10 The taking of evidence of one (1) witness 11 in a location other than the location of Forest though, I 12 would suggest would be reasonable if a witness due to 13 some logical reason and principled reason such as an 14 infirmity is unable to travel to Forest, but when the 15 witness in the case here has travelled to Forest every 16 day because he lives in Lambton County, that principle 17 would not apply. 18 And it -- logic says and I might as well 19 be forthright about it, this application is to 20 convenience the media. It's to draw media attention and 21 that is the only reason is my respectful submission. I 22 suggest that is an improper reason to have this evidence 23 heard in Toronto and if accepted, it's the thin edge of 24 the wedge as the arguments made by Mr. George would 25 equally apply to all witnesses.

26
  1  OBJ            MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN:   Mr.
  2  Commissioner, I'm sorry, I have to object.  My Friend
  3  said this was the only reason and it's just patently not
  4  the case and I just -- I can't let that stay on the
  5  records.
  6                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   It's better
  7  if you don't interrupt in a middle of a submission, Mr.
  8  Klippenstein.
  9                 Carry on, Mr. Sulman.
 10                 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN:   Thank you, Mr.
 11  Commissioner.  I didn't say it was the only reason.  I
 12  said it's my respectful submission that this is the
 13  reason.
 14                 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   Yes.
 15                 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN:   In fact, I'll go on
 16  to speak to the other reasons.  With regard to Mr.
 17  George's comments on the personal stake of the public all
 18  of Toronto which he gives as another reason.  
 19                 I would suggest that the question of
 20  police use in protests that he also refers to in his
 21  letter you'll recall, the question of police use in
 22  protests other than situations similar to this takeover
 23  of public property by an Aboriginal group is not within
 24  the mandate of this Inquiry.
 25                 I would not expect the Commission report,

1 with respect, would touch on all police -- police use in 2 all protests of all kinds. 3 And secondly, I point out that safe 4 drinking water and the regulation thereof which was the 5 centrepiece of the Walkerton Inquiry unquestionably is a 6 matter in which all citizens of Ontario who use water, I 7 don't say that's that every person in Ontario but it is 8 the vast majority, all citizens of Ontario would have 9 more personal stake in that issue. And the evidence in 10 that Inquiry was heard in Walkerton where the tragic 11 deaths occurred. 12 And third, is the issue of the legitimacy 13 of this process by taking control of provincial lands. 14 It's still very much an open issue. We can't say, as the 15 letter seems to suggest, that there's been an affirmative 16 decision on that. 17 That's still very much an open issue in 18 this Inquiry if you take a balanced approach to it. Mr. 19 George urges on you finally that Toronto is closest to 20 the present decision makers and it is our respectful 21 submission that this is a rather facile suggestion. 22 When the time comes, I think this is very 23 important, when the time comes for the "decision makers" 24 in quotation marks, from Mr. George's letter, to make a 25 decision, it should be on the basis of your written

1 report. They will have the opportunity to read it 2 wherever they want, be it in Toronto or wherever else 3 they may be located, but any action by the present 4 decision makers should be based on your report at the end 5 of the Proceeding and not on the basis of hearing a 6 single witness. 7 So, it matters not whether his evidence is 8 given in Toronto, in fact, it's my submission, Mr. 9 Commissioner, that the so-called decision makers ought 10 not to be hearing individual witnesses' submissions 11 because only doing that might bias their decision. They 12 should properly wait until you, Mr. Commissioner, having 13 heard all the witnesses, having digested all of the 14 information in context and having come up with the 15 decision. 16 So, I don't -- it's my submission that the 17 suggestion that being in Toronto, being closer to the 18 decision makers is of no help to you in making a decision 19 on whether this Witness should be heard in Toronto, in 20 fact, it -- it really, quite frankly, is -- is of little 21 consequence. 22 It's our submission, sir, that this 23 request is really made in order to convenience the media 24 -- Toronto-based media and that is not a principled 25 reason.

1 With respect, sir, and -- and I -- I say 2 this with respect to the process, particularly and to you 3 and to Mr. George, it strikes me as wrong for the person 4 who is has requested the Inquiry in the first place, who 5 has been in Forest every day, day in and day out, and I 6 don't say this to hurt anyone's feelings, but I think it 7 has to be placed on the record, that's my obligation, I 8 think it's wrong for -- for that person to say, If I 9 don't get to give my evidence where I want to give my 10 evidence, that I won't cooperate, you'll have to summons 11 me and you'll have to bring me physically. 12 I submit that's just wrong to place the 13 Commission and the Commissioner in that position. 14 In conclusion, it is my position that any 15 decision to hear evidence of a witness should be based on 16 the interest of the Public. This is, after all, a Public 17 Inquiry, an inquiry public made up of both native and 18 non-native persons and it should be in the interest of 19 the Public most affected by this tragedy, namely the 20 people of Lambton County, not on the basis of convenience 21 of media and not on the basis of desire for publicity and 22 not on the basis of requests of any one (1) witness, 23 unless it's based on a witness who has an infirmity or 24 has some logical reason. 25 This tragedy, not unlike the Walkerton

1 tainted water tragedy, occurred in small town, rural 2 Ontario and like the Walkerton Inquiry, the proper place 3 for the hearing of the evidence is at the closest 4 practical location to where the tragedy occurred and 5 continues to affect native and non-native citizens of 6 Lambton County. 7 Finally, sir, there is in the second-to- 8 last paragraph in the -- in Mr. George's February 15th 9 letter -- I'm not sure whether you have that before you, 10 sir? 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I think I 12 do. 13 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: But, I'll -- I can 14 give you a minute to turn that up. 15 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Second last 16 paragraph? 17 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Yes. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: The 19 paragraph that begins with, "Furthermore"? 20 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: Furthermore. Should 21 I read it onto the record, sir? 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: That's fine. 23 MR. DOUGLAS SULMAN: If Mr. -- I know we 24 all have the letter, but I think it might be better if it 25 were on the record. This is -- I'm quoting from the

1 letter of February 15th of Mr. Sam George to Mr. Derry 2 Millar. And it reads in the second-to-last paragraph: 3 "Furthermore, we believe that no public 4 discussion of this request..." 5 That being his request to transfer to 6 Toronto: 7 "...could be dealt with fully and 8 fairly unless the confidential tapes 9 that were the subject of an earlier 10 motion are publicly disclosed because 11 we believe they are critical evidence 12 for some of the principles underlying 13 my request." End of quote. 14 Now, I -- I won't give you lengthy 15 submissions on that, but I want to put forward my concern 16 that in that second-to-last paragraph it raises a concern 17 beyond the request for his evidence to be heard in 18 Toronto. 19 And it makes a puzzling reference to the 20 taped conversations which were the subject matter of an 21 earlier motion. This reference, sir, and I put it 22 forward to you, gives me concern and should give all of 23 us concern that there will be or might be -- and I can't 24 tell what the wording means, but I can only read between 25 the lines, there might be some attempt to obtain through

1 the back door that which was denied through the front 2 door in a lengthy argument we all had before you several 3 months ago. 4 I -- I don't know what it means but I 5 think it should give you concern too, sir, and I just 6 want to bring that forward. If the evidence is heard in 7 Toronto, if what this means as if the evidence is heard 8 in Toronto will be an attempt to reveal context of tape - 9 - the tape out of context and out of order, that gives me 10 grave concern and it should give the Commission concern 11 and I'm sure it would give other Counsel concern. 12 And I trust, sir, that in any decision you 13 make with regard to the calling of the Witness you will 14 examine the letter and you will examine the intent -- 15 meaning of the reference in this paragraph so we keep our 16 process which I think -- which is -- not only do I think, 17 I know and I support the process and that's why I'm 18 standing here, I want to keep the process clean and I'm 19 sure the Commission does also. 20 And should there be steps necessary to 21 ensure that that which was denied several months ago 22 doesn't come through the back door whether your decision 23 is to hear the evidence of Mr. George in Toronto or hear 24 it here which I submit is the proper location. 25 In any event, I would request that you

1 take such steps as you may deem necessary to protect that 2 evidence coming in through the back door and -- and 3 keeping the process pure to your earlier decision. 4 Those -- I appreciate taking your time to 5 do this, sir, and those are my respectful submissions. 6 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 7 very much, Mr. Sulman. 8 Counsel for Deb Hutton? Yes? 9 MS. ERIN TULLY: Just before that, I'm 10 Counsel for Christopher Hodgson -- 11 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Oh, I'm 12 sorry. 13 MS. ERIN TULLY: -- and I just want to 14 say that we -- the Commission counsel has accurately 15 relayed our position and we don't object to the request, 16 just the submissions in support of the request. 17 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 18 Does anybody else -- yes, counsel on behalf of Deb 19 Hutton? 20 Is there anybody else who wishes to speak 21 against the motion other than Counsel for Deb Hutton. 22 No, so this is the last one. 23 MS. MELISSA PANJER: Mr. Commissioner, 24 Mr. Millar stated that Ms. Hutton objects to the request. 25 We do not formally oppose Mr. George's request that his

1 testimony be heard in Toronto, however, we do have 2 concerns with respect to the reasons he and his Counsel 3 have put forward in support of his request and which we 4 raised in a letter to Mr. Millar. 5 We also agree with the written submissions 6 of Ms. Spies with respect to the -- her objections to the 7 reasons advanced by Mr. George. Thank you. 8 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 9 very much. Sorry, Ms. Jones, you wish to speak on this? 10 MS. KAREN JONES: Mr. Commissioner, I 11 just wanted to indicate briefly that the concerns of the 12 OPPA are that decisions regarding venue either in general 13 or for specific witnesses ought to be made on a principle 14 basis. 15 You had determined that at least for the 16 most part that Forest was the appropriate venue and you - 17 - and you surely do have discretion to change that and 18 you've indicated in the past that you're going to 19 consider that. 20 Mr. Commissioner, in terms of looking at 21 venue on an individual witness's basis, our position is 22 that all the parties at this Proceeding and the vast 23 majority of the witnesses who are appearing for parties, 24 have significant stakes in this proceeding for the 25 reasons that were set out earlier to you.

1 They all have interest in stake here and 2 they all ought to be treated on a principle basis and 3 fairly. And we agree with the submissions that have been 4 made to you today both in writing and orally about the 5 reasons set out in Mr. George's letter. 6 And in addition, we would assume that all 7 the parties in this Proceeding and the witnesses have the 8 respect and will be treated respectfully and fairly by 9 Commission Counsel and by the Commissioner. 10 And we can certainly see some 11 circumstances where an individual would not be able to 12 testify in Forest and one (1) was given to you already 13 that they were unable to do so. 14 But other than that there ought to be a 15 principle basis to move and if the reason given by 16 Counsel is -- by your Commission Counsel, is for respect 17 for Mr. George, we would anticipate that all witnesses 18 that come would be treated with respect as would all 19 parties. 20 And it leaves open the possibility as was 21 said earlier, that unless there are principled and 22 substantive reasons for moving either the venue in 23 general or for a witness, if someone prefers to testify 24 in a location other than Forest and they're granted that, 25 we would expect that that same consideration would be

1 given to all witnesses in this Proceeding. 2 And if you're motivated to grant the 3 request out of respect for Mr. George, we would 4 anticipate that you would accede to similar requests from 5 other witnesses who prefer to testify for whatever reason 6 in another venue. 7 It may well, as was set out earlier, leave 8 it open for a chaotic situation for the Commission in 9 terms of acceding to requests, which is why we come back 10 to our first point, which is that decisions ought to be 11 made in a way that is fair and appears fair and the most 12 consistent way to do that is to have a principle that's 13 applied equally to the witnesses and to the parties. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 15 very much. 16 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Commissioner, I don't 17 know if anyone else wishes to speak, but Mr. Clifford 18 George would like to address you. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Yes, that's 20 fine. Good morning, Mr. George. 21 MR. CLIFFORD GEORGE: Good morning, sir. 22 I didn't know this was going to happen or I would have 23 written down my statements, but as it is, I think I can 24 remember what I need -- need to say -- the most essential 25 part of -- of this Inquiry.

1 It would do irreparable damage here to -- 2 to -- if we moved it over there for -- just for sake of 3 one (1) person and not only that, but he does not 4 represent the death of Dudley George completely. There 5 are many, many other families that are against this and 6 for that reason and -- and not only that, but a third 7 reason is there -- there's lots of us who would not even 8 be able to attend, me for medical reasons and the other 9 people for -- for family reasons that cannot leave the 10 premises for any length of time and the money. We 11 haven't got the money to be travelling here and there. 12 And the whole community is getting very 13 interested in here -- that's the surrounding area. I 14 hear good reports on -- on the way this -- this Inquiry 15 is turning for the good, to bring it out what this 16 Inquiry is supposed to be for. But, that -- I think 17 that's about all I can say. Thank you, sir. 18 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 19 very much, Mr. George. Is that it, then? I'm going to-- 20 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I don't know if Mr. 21 Klippenstein wants to add anything. 22 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm going to 23 take a break. That's it, that's all the people who are 24 speaking against. That's all I want to hear from at the 25 moment.

1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yeah, I just want to 2 make a couple of comments with respect to -- 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: When we come 4 back. Just before you go on, I may want to hear from Mr. 5 Klippenstein, but I want -- 6 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: My submission 7 will be two (2) minutes or less, so if you wish to hear 8 it now, then -- 9 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I'm sorry. 10 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Well, perhaps we'll 11 take a short break and then you can -- 12 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: I would like 13 to take a short break and then hear from you if 14 necessary, Mr. Klippenstein, and then we'll make a 15 decision. Thank you very much. 16 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 17 for fifteen (15) minutes. 18 19 --- Upon recessing at 9:50 a.m. 20 --- Upon resuming at 9:55 a.m. 21 22 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 23 resumed. Please be seated. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 25 very much. Mr. Klippenstein, I would like to hear from

1 you. I'd like to hear from anybody who would like to 2 speak in favour of the Motion, but I definitely would 3 like to hear from you now. 4 MR. MURRAY KLIPPENSTEIN: Thank you, 5 Commissioner. I don't propose to -- to go into a lot of 6 details. I think Commission Counsel has very helpfully 7 outlined the various positions and I would note that 8 almost all parties do not object to the substance of Mr. 9 George's request. 10 A number -- secondly, a number of parties 11 have referred to the need to deal with an issue such as 12 this on principle and I just wouldn't want it to be 13 thought that Mr. George's request did not proceed on 14 principle, because his request does include a number of 15 principles that Commission Counsel read out, including 16 where the events took place and the location of affected 17 population. 18 Now it maybe that it's not for this 19 Commission at this time to fully debate those issues but 20 Mr. George's request is a principled request and I don't 21 want the wrong impression left on that point. 22 Secondly, Mr. Clifford George raised some 23 concerns and I think that Sam George and the family 24 tremendously appreciate all that Clifford George has done 25 over the years and his attendance here. I would note

1 that he is almost unique in his dedication to physically 2 attending here and if the Commission is seriously 3 considering this request, it might be that some very 4 special accommodation assistance to Clifford George 5 including transportation and accommodation probably 6 wouldn't change Mr. Clifford George's mind, but might be 7 a fair thing to offer. 8 Those are all my submissions, unless you 9 have some questions. 10 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 11 very much, Mr. Klippenstein. 12 Now, everybody has indicated or has had 13 their positions indicated by my Counsel but I would like 14 to give anybody who wishes to speak in favour of the 15 request, an opportunity to do so, if you wish to. 16 If not, I intend to reserve my decision at 17 this point. 18 If anybody wishes to make an oral 19 submission -- Mr. Millar? I'm sorry, Mr. Eyolfson, you 20 do? 21 MR. BRIAN EYOLFSON: Good morning, Mr. 22 Commissioner. 23 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 24 morning, Mr. Eyolfson. 25 MR. BRIAN EYOLFSON: ALST supports Mr.

41
  1   George's request to have his evidence heard in Toronto
  2   for essentially the same reasons indicated by Mr. Millar,
  3   first and foremost, out of respect for Mr. George, both
  4   personally and as a representative for the Estate of
  5   Dudley George and in light of his efforts to date to have
  6   this Inquiry called.
  7                  In addition, ALST submits that the events
  8   surrounding the death of Dudley George and the questions
  9   raised by those events in these Proceedings are relevant
 10   to people all across Ontario and, I would submit,
 11   especially of concern to aboriginal people across the
 12   Province.
 13                  And there are real benefits to holding
 14   portions of these Hearings in more than one location in
 15   terms of raising public awareness, of the process of the
 16   important issues being addressed in the process and
 17   increasing public accessibility.
 18                  Hearing the evidence of Mr. George in
 19   Toronto would provide an opportunity for more people to
 20   access the Commission's Hearings, including aboriginal
 21   people who are affected by the broader issues raised in
 22   these Proceedings.
 23                  As we explained in our original
 24   application materials, the Toronto Aboriginal community
 25   is quite large and diverse.  It's estimated at between

1 forty and seventy thousand (70,000) people and that makes 2 it one (1) of the largest, if not the largest, aboriginal 3 communities in Canada. 4 ALST never understood that these Hearings 5 would all be taking place in one (1) location as Mr. 6 Millar pointed out Rule 2 of the Rules of Practice and 7 Procedure refer to the Hearings taking place in both 8 Toronto and Forest. 9 As well, the Commission's website notes 10 that while the bulk of the Hearings will take place in 11 Forest they're subject to the Commissioner's discretion 12 and even the consideration of the circumstances of 13 particular witnesses. 14 And while we feel it's important that a 15 significant portion of the Hearings take place in Forest 16 near the community where the incidents took place, we 17 believe for the above reasons that there are benefits to 18 holding at least the evidence of one (1) witness in 19 Toronto and we support the request. 20 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 21 very much. Mr. Millar...? Oh, I'm sorry. Yes, sir? 22 MR. MATTHEW HORNER: Good morning, Mr. 23 Commissioner, my name is Matthew Horner and I represent 24 Chiefs of Ontario. 25 The Chiefs of Ontario do support

43
  1   Commission Counsel's position that these -- that at least
  2   some witnesses in the particular circumstances such as
  3   Mr. George should be able to provide their testimony in
  4   Toronto if -- if that needs -- if they so desire.  
  5                  The reasons have been put forth by Mr. --
  6   by Mr. Millar and so I don't want to go on those again,
  7   although I would submit that some parties have raised the
  8   point that  -- that public access through the media is
  9   somehow an irrelevant or inappropriate consideration for
 10   you and we would submit that given the public function of
 11   a Commission of Inquiry and the social function that such
 12   Inquiries serve, that ensuring that the broadest scope of
 13   Ontario and Canadian society is able to hear the -- the -
 14   - and bear witness to the -- the hearings of the Inquiry
 15   is not an inappropriate consideration.
 16                  And while it is very important that the
 17   primary location of these Hearings has been in Forest,
 18   there are different schools of thought and if one (1)
 19   particular witness in -- in -- not inconvenient and
 20   appropriate circumstance would -- would like to give
 21   their testimony in Toronto, The Chiefs of Ontario are
 22   generally supportive of such -- such actions.
 23                  COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN:   Thank you
 24   very much.  Anybody else?  No? 
 25                  Mr. Millar...?

1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I just wanted to 2 address a couple of things; make a couple of points. 3 Firstly, I certainly appreciate the 4 comments of Mr. Clifford George which I had not heard 5 before this morning and the sentiments that he expresses. 6 I wanted to say that Mr. Sulman spoke about the tapes and 7 that because there's a reference in the letter, I would 8 not expect and I did not take that reference as an 9 attempt by Mr. George to do something through the back 10 door that's already been ruled on and I would not expect 11 that to happen and it just won't happen. 12 The issue raised by Ms. Jones about 13 respect; the Commission respects all witnesses -- we've - 14 - and will respect all witnesses and if other witnesses 15 have a requested, then it will be considered. It's not - 16 - I don't think that this leads to -- this particular 17 request leads to the chaos as some people have suggested 18 and -- but the -- those -- I really don't have anything 19 else to add other than I had not heard from Mr. Clifford 20 George before today. 21 And I must say that Mr. -- when I -- when 22 I talked about the people who had been in attendance 23 virtually all the time I missed Mr. Mark George who's 24 been here virtually every day as well. Thank you, 25 Commissioner.

1 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 2 very much. I intend to reserve making a decision in this 3 matter. Hopefully not for long, perhaps by the end of 4 the week. But if not, early next week. It does not 5 interfere with our flow of witnesses. Mr. George was not 6 going to be the next witness nor the one after. 7 So, if I don't make the decision today or 8 tomorrow, it will not interfere with our normal 9 procedure. But I assure you I will make every effort to, 10 during the course of the day and tomorrow, to make a 11 decision before the end of the week if I possibly can. 12 So, now I know we've already had a recess 13 but I think I would like to have a short break. Is Ms. 14 Hensel calling the next witness? 15 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Ms. Hensel's going to 16 lead Mr. Kaczanowski so it might be appropriate to have a 17 short, maybe ten (10) minute, break and then we'll start 18 with Mr. Kaczanowski. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: And we 20 should be able to complete the evidence of the two (2) 21 witnesses that we have lined up for the balance of today 22 and tomorrow? 23 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Yes. Yes, I hope so. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Well, we'll 25 have a short break now.

1 MR. DERRY MILLAR: I would be -- I would 2 be surprised if we couldn't. 3 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you 4 very much. 5 MR. DERRY MILLAR: Thanks. 6 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry will recess 7 for ten (10) minutes. 8 9 --- Upon recessing at 10:05 a.m. 10 --- Upon resuming at 10:20 a.m. 11 12 THE REGISTRAR: This Inquiry is now 13 resumed. Please be seated. 14 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 15 morning. 16 MS. KATHERINE HENSEL: Good morning, 17 Commissioner. Our next witness is Constable Wallace 18 Kaczanowski. He is in the room. 19 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Good 20 morning, Constable. 21 MR. WALLACE KACZANOWSKI: Good morning. 22 THE REGISTRAR: Good morning, Mr. 23 Kaczanowski. Do you prefer to swear on the Bible, affirm 24 or use an alternate oath, sir? 25 MR. WALLACE KACZANOWSKI: I'll swear on

1 the Bible. 2 THE REGISTRAR: Very good. Take the 3 Bible in your right hand please and state your name in 4 full. 5 MR. WALLACE KACZANOWSKI: Wallace Gregory 6 Kaczanowski. 7 THE REGISTRAR: And could you spell your 8 name for us please? 9 THE WITNESS: K-A-C-Z-A-N-O-W-S-K-I. 10 11 WALLACE GREGORY KACZANOWSKI, Sworn 12 13 EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MS. KATHERINE HENSEL. 14 Q: Good morning, Constable. Should I be 15 addressing you as Constable Kaczanowski? 16 A: That's fine. 17 Q: Thank you. I'm just going to start 18 with some questions about you -- your personal background 19 and your family history. What is your date of birth, 20 sir? 21 A: December 6th, 1955. 22 Q: And who are your parents? 23 A: William and Irene Kaczanowski. 24 Q: And are either of them a member of 25 the Band at Kettle and Stony Point First Nation?

1 A: My mother was. She's deceased now. 2 Q: Okay. And what is her maiden name? 3 A: Bressette. 4 Q: Okay. Where do you currently reside? 5 A: Fort Franks, Ontario. 6 Q: And you were born in Sarnia? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Where were you raised? 9 A: My first four (4) years of life was 10 in Kettle -- Kettle Point and then we moved to 11 California. 12 Q: And how long did you live in 13 California? 14 A: Until 1991. 15 Q: All right. And what did you do in -- 16 where did you move in 1991? 17 A: I first moved back to Sarnia and then 18 several months later to Kettle Point. 19 Q: I understand, sir, that you served in 20 the US military? 21 A: That's correct. 22 Q: Around what time was that? 23 A: '74 to '77 in the United States Air 24 Force. 25 Q: And what duties did you perform?

1 A: I was considered an air passenger 2 specialist. 3 Q: And can you describe briefly what -- 4 what you did in that capacity? 5 A: My duties were that of, same as an 6 airline specialist, where conducting military flights, 7 handle baggage, ticket agents. 8 Q: For the US Air Force? 9 A: For the US Air Force. 10 Q: Thank you. And you hold dual US and 11 Canadian citizenship? 12 A: That's correct. 13 Q: All right. I'm going to move now 14 onto some areas around your professional background as a 15 police officer. 16 I understand that you underwent your 17 initial police training in Aylmer, Ontario? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Around what time was that, what year? 20 A: June 14th, 1992. 21 Q: Okay. And how long was that course? 22 A: At that time it was thirteen (13) 23 weeks. 24 Q: And can you tell us, if you can 25 recall, the name of the course?

1 A: Aylmer Basic College. 2 Q: Okay. And what were you taught? In 3 a general way, what were you taught in that course? 4 A: Basic rules of a police officer, 5 general areas of the Provincial and Federal Laws. 6 Q: Hmm hmm. 7 A: And a lot of officer safety 8 techniques. 9 Q: Okay. I understand that after you 10 successfully completed that course, you began policing as 11 a police constable with First Nations policing at Kettle 12 Point? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Kettle and Stony Point? And that you 15 have worked as a police officer at Kettle and Stony Point 16 First Nations since that time? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: Can you describe for us, briefly, 19 what other police training you would have received since 20 then? 21 A: I've received marine basic training, 22 I've received major -- major crime investigation, family 23 violence investigation, youth crime investigation, 24 general investigation techniques, SOCO investigations. 25 Q: Can you tell us what SOCO is?

1 A: That was scenes of crime 2 investigation. 3 Q: All right. And as any -- as part of 4 any of those training programs, have you received 5 training in negotiations and conflict resolution? 6 A: No. 7 Q: Thank you. Okay, I'm going to take 8 you now to the period between 1992 and 1995. Can you 9 describe the command structure that you were subject to 10 at that time as a police officer at Kettle and Stony 11 Point? 12 A: As a First Nations officer, we were a 13 program within the OPP structure -- 14 Q: Hmm hmm. 15 A: Our policing orders would come down 16 through Forest Detachment through Sergeant Bressette and 17 to the officers on duty. 18 Q: Okay. So, you did take direction, if 19 indirectly, from the OPP? 20 A: Yes. 21 Q: Okay. Would you have taken direction 22 at various times, I'm not asking you to describe these 23 times, but directly from the OPP and not through Sergeant 24 Bressette, for example, if he was not on duty at the 25 time?

1 A: If the situation called, yes. 2 Q: And at that time, I understand that 3 Miles Bressette was a Staff Sergeant? 4 A: In '92? 5 Q: In '92. 6 A: I'm not sure if it was '92 or '93 but 7 when I first came on he was a Sergeant and became a Staff 8 Sergeant at a later time. 9 Q: Okay. And I understand he was also 10 given the title Chief of Police at some time around that 11 period? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: Okay. But that came from the Band 14 Council? 15 A: I believe so. 16 Q: Chief and council? 17 A: I believe so. 18 Q: During that period, can you describe 19 or characterize the relationship that you had with the 20 OPP on -- in the course of your day-to-day policing 21 operations? 22 A: My experience with the OPP officers 23 at that time were very favourable. We got along well, 24 worked together well. We would back them up when needed, 25 and in turn they would back us up when we needed them.

1 Q: Okay. Would you describe those 2 relations -- relations as respectful? 3 A: Respectful, yes. 4 Q: And friendly? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Okay, and I understand that police 7 operations at Kettle and Stony Point First Nations were 8 overseen by the OPP Detachment in Forest, Ontario? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Do you know who the Commanding 11 Officer was at that Detachment? 12 A: I believe there were several during 13 that time. There might have been an Inspector Lacroix or 14 Inspector Carson. 15 Q: Okay. And finally in this area, I 16 understand that until 1997, your police service did work 17 under the direction of the OPP but that changed in 1997 18 when the Anishnaabeg Police Service took over policing of 19 -- the policing of Kettle Point? 20 A: Yes, that's correct. 21 Q: Okay. And you've worked under 22 Anishnaabeg Police Service direction since that time? 23 A: Yes. 24 Q: Okay. Do you currently report to the 25 OPP in any way as police officer?

1 A: No. No. 2 Q: Okay. Okay, let me take you back now 3 to 1992. We understand from other witnesses there was an 4 incident during that time that occurred at Kettle and 5 Stony Point First Nation involving an individual by the 6 name of Darryl Lee George? 7 Can you describe that incident for us? 8 A: Darryl George was wanted for assault 9 on a female. 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: And he had got information that he 12 was wanted -- he was wanted by the police. He had called 13 the Kettle Point Detachment, I believe around 11:30 that 14 evening and indicated that if the police wanted him, that 15 they would have to come to him and they were to bring 16 their lunch, because he wasn't going to come willingly. 17 Q: And what happened after that? 18 A: I gave this information to Sergeant 19 Bressette. Sergeant Bressette had information that 20 Darryl George may have a AK-47 and then Sergeant 21 Bressette had ordered or contacted Forest Detachment and 22 a plan was put in place. 23 Q: Were you aware of what that plan was? 24 A: Yes. 25 Q: Okay. And what was -- what did you -

1 - what information did you have at that point? 2 A: We were aware Darryl George was -- he 3 was a located at a residence on Tecumseh Drive, Kettle 4 Point and the TRU Team was brought in. 5 Q: And did you see -- were you involved 6 with -- with the operations of the TRU Team at that time? 7 A: If I recall correctly, once the TRU 8 Team arrived, my involvement was very little as they have 9 their own plan in place. Mine was merely observation at 10 a checkpoint, not a checkpoint, just an observation 11 point. 12 Q: And that was on the reserve? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Do you recall how many officers -- 15 OPP officers attended at the reserve? 16 A: No, number wise, no. But there was 17 quite a few. 18 Q: Would you say more than a hundred 19 (100)? 20 A: No. 21 Q: No. 22 A: No. 23 Q: More than twenty (20)? 24 A: I would say around that figure, yes. 25 Q: Okay. And how did that situation --

1 how was that situation resolved? 2 A: Darryl George ended up giving himself 3 up. 4 Q: And do you know how that -- the 5 events that led up to him doing so? 6 A: The TRU Team had the house 7 surrounded. 8 Q: Hmm hmm. 9 A: At one point in time, Bernard George 10 attended the scene and had walked up and talked to Darryl 11 at the house. When Bernard left, there was some time in 12 between that and later on Sergeant Bressette and 13 Constable John Peltier pulled up in front of the 14 residence. Sergeant Bressette walked up to the house and 15 Darryl had given himself up. 16 Q: Okay, and did you witness Sergeant 17 Bressette approaching the house? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Okay. And you saw him take Darryl 20 George into custody? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And did you ever speak to Darryl 23 George about the reasons for him giving himself up? 24 A: No. 25 Q: I'm going to take you now to 1993.

1 We understand that on May 6 of 1993, many people moved 2 into Camp Ipperwash to occupy it. Prior to May 6th of 3 1993, what did you know in your personal capacity as a 4 Band member, about the Stoney Point or the land issues 5 surrounding Stoney Point? 6 A: Well, I moved on to Kettle Point in 7 1991, prior to that I had no knowledge of the Camp 8 Ipperwash issue. Since then I have acquired knowledge 9 that the land had been appropriated through the War 10 Measures Act and since had not been returned to the First 11 Nations. 12 I had knowledge that it was getting to the 13 point where people were frustrated because the land was 14 not returned and they'd gotten quite upset again -- 15 further that the land was now going to be used as -- as a 16 cadet training camp. 17 Q: And as a police officer, did you have 18 any -- any knowledge of -- prior to people going into the 19 Army Camp on May 6th, 1993, that such a move was being 20 contemplated? 21 A: What move? 22 Q: To -- to occupy the Army Camp or 23 parts of the Army Camp? 24 A: No. 25 Q: Around that time how many police

1 officers were staffing the Kettle and Stony Point First 2 Nation police detachment? 3 A: Seven (7). 4 Q: Can you describe for us how you 5 learned that people had, in fact, gone into Camp 6 Ipperwash? 7 A: I don't recall if I was on duty when 8 it happened or if I was -- if I was rest days, vacation, 9 I'm not sure, but it -- it was a big -- biggest thing 10 happening at that time. 11 Q: So, you would have heard immediately? 12 A: Yes. 13 Q: But you cannot recall -- 14 A: I can't recall how I found that out. 15 Q: So, you can't recall whether you 16 learned of that in your official capacity as a police 17 officer or just through word of mouth in the community? 18 A: Well, I believe if -- once I found 19 out I -- I became a -- a police officer because I'm sure 20 I was called to duty to assist in whatever was needed. 21 Q: Can you recall actually being called 22 to duty at that time? 23 A: No, but I'm assuming that that's what 24 would have took place. 25 Q: Okay. And I think we should deal

1 with something at this point. I understand, Constable 2 Kaczanowski that you don't currently have access to 3 anything but a few very small pieces of your police 4 notebooks from that time period? 5 A: That's correct. 6 Q: And do you currently know the 7 location of your police notebooks from the period 1993 to 8 1995? 9 A: I have two (2) notebooks from 1992 10 and 1993 at my detachment and I have one (1) book that's 11 missing -- 12 Q: Hmm hmm. 13 A: -- from '95. 14 Q: Okay. And do you know the location 15 of that notebook? 16 A: No, I don't. 17 Q: Okay. I can tell you, Commissioner, 18 that we have made inquiries through the -- the Band, the 19 OPP, former lawyers for the Band and -- and Constable 20 Kaczanowski, himself, and we have been thus far unable to 21 locate his notebooks for many of the relevant time 22 periods, so, he is -- and we do recognize he is at a bit 23 of a disadvantage in that regard. 24 COMMISSIONER SIDNEY LINDEN: Thank you. 25 MS. KATHERINE HENSEL: And if and when --

1 if and when those notebooks are located, they will be 2 produced to the Parties and perhaps we may have more 3 issues to address with Constable Kaczanowski. 4 5 CONTINUED BY MS. KATHERINE HENSEL: 6 Q: During the period 1993, after people 7 went into the Army Camp, but prior to July 29th, of 1995 8 when people went into -- we understand from other 9 witnesses, people went into the built-up area -- during 10 that time period did you ever visit any of the people who 11 were occupying the Camp? 12 A: No. 13 Q: So, in a personal capacity you never 14 visited? 15 A: No. 16 Q: All right. And did you spend any 17 time at the Camp for any reason during that time period? 18 A: There was one (1) incident where 19 myself and Constable Al Wolfe went into the Army Camp, 20 back into the back -- back area where there are several 21 lakes. 22 I was surprised that Constable Wolfe 23 living in Kettle Point all his life had no knowledge of 24 those lakes and I, myself, like to fish and have fished 25 those lakes. We went back there to take -- to take a

1 look at the lakes. 2 Q: Okay. And how did you enter into the 3 Army Camp? 4 A: We drove through the main gate. 5 Q: Hmm hmm. And can you describe what 6 happened next? 7 A: We were back at the lakes and we were 8 approached by, I believe, three (3) vehicles full of 9 occupiers. 10 Q: And what happened next? 11 A: We were told to leave, that we 12 weren't welcome back there. 13 Q: Can you describe the tone of that 14 conversation? 15 A: Hostile to say the least. 16 Q: Okay. And do you recall who you were 17 speaking to? 18 A: Glenn George. 19 Q: Okay. Around what time, if you can 20 recall did that incident occur? 21 A: I believe it would have been -- 22 you're talking about day or night or timeframe? 23 Q: No. What time -- what timeframe in 24 terms of months or years? 25 A: I -- I can't recall.

1 Q: Okay. But, it would have been -- 2 A: It would have been a time when they 3 were occupying the army camp. 4 Q: All right. Okay. Did you enter in a 5 personal capacity, did you enter into the army camp for 6 any other reason during that time? 7 A: I don't recall if it was exactly 8 during that time but I had -- I had been back into those 9 lakes several times either prior to -- it was never after 10 to fish the lakes. I entered it through Outer Drive, I 11 just hopped a fence and went back there fishing that way. 12 Q: Okay. Did you do that regularly, or? 13 A: I believe it's only three (3) times. 14 Q: Did you ever have any discussions 15 with any of the people occupying the camp about the 16 occupation during the time period we're -- we're 17 discussing? 18 A: I -- I'm sure I have in a 19 professional -- in a police status and also as a off duty 20 officer. I'm sure I talked with everybody. Not 21 everybody, but people about it. 22 Q: And can you describe the nature of 23 those conversations? 24 A: Just idle talk. 25 Q: Just idle talk. And as a police

1 officer, did you ever engage in any policing at the army 2 camp -- of the activities of the occupiers? 3 A: There was two (2) separate incidents. 4 1. I was asked by the OPP to go in and 5 speak to a Roger George who had warrants for him. They 6 asked me if I can get Roger to turn himself in. 7 I went in there, I spoke to Roger and at 8 that time Roger asked me to give him an hour and that he 9 would meet me somewhere and turn himself in. 10 Q: And did he in fact, to your 11 knowledge, turn himself in? 12 A: He turned himself into me, yes. 13 Q: Okay. You mentioned two (2) 14 incidents. 15 A: There was a second time when there 16 was a helicopter shooting. 17 Q: Okay. We'll come to that. 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: I have a few more questions before 20 that. Did you discuss the issue of the occupation with 21 any members of the military; for example, the military 22 police? 23 A: I recall being present at one time 24 shortly after the first portion of the occupation. And 25 they were -- there was an OPP officer and I don't recall

1 who he was and there was some military personnel. They 2 were discussing if the occupation moved into the built-up 3 area, that the plan was that military was going to -- 4 going to surrender peacefully, drop the keys and just 5 leave the area. 6 Q: Can you remember the names or 7 identities of anyone other than yourself that attending 8 that meeting? 9 A: No. 10 Q: And can you give us a rough idea of 11 how long that meeting took place before people entered 12 the built-up area in July of 1995? 13 A: No. It would only be speculation on 14 my part if I said anything. 15 Q: Okay. And that was the -- the only 16 time that you have ever had any direct contact -- I'm 17 sorry, did you say that there were members of the 18 military police at that meeting as well; DND personnel? 19 A: Yes. I -- I don't think it was a 20 scheduled meeting. I think it was something like they 21 were on patrol and we met in one of the barracks and we, 22 you know, it was like a description. If this was to take 23 place and then drop the keys and just leave. I think it 24 was something to that affect. 25 Q: Did you pa -- did your patrols

1 normally take to the area of Camp Ipperwash? 2 A: On the outside of it, 21 Highway and 3 Army Camp Road. Not inside. 4 Q: All right. So, on this occasion you 5 would have been -- how did you have occasion to go inside 6 the Army Camp? 7 A: I don't -- I don't recall it. I just 8 recall having that -- listening to the conversation. I 9 was just a patrol officer, really not having an 10 opportunity for any input during these conversations. 11 Q: All right. And, in general terms, 12 did you ever have any communications with the OPP or were 13 you aware of any protocols with the OPP between your 14 police service and the OPP about the policing of the Army 15 Camp? 16 A: It was my understanding since they 17 were still under DND ruling that the OPP would be doing 18 the policing within the Camp. 19 Q: And you described earlier how your 20 police service was under the OPP umbrella -- 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: -- but when you say that the OPP 23 would be policing the Army Camp, you mean the OPP other 24 than the Kettle Point Police Service? 25 A: Yes.

1 Q: And would you, from time to time, 2 ever provide intelligence or other information to the OPP 3 concerning the Occupants of Camp Ipperwash? 4 A: No. 5 Q: Did they ever ask you for information 6 about the Occupants of Camp Ipperwash? 7 A: I may have been asked about 8 individuals, I'm not sure, you know, what type of person 9 this person is or -- as far as intelligence I -- 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: -- you know, I don't think there was 12 anything I -- I was able to add other than what they 13 already knew. 14 Q: Nothing you would regard as 15 intelligence? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Okay. Taking you now to August of 18 1993, you've already referred to it and we have heard 19 from other witnesses about an alleged or an incident 20 involving an allegation of the shooting of a helicopter 21 while it was flying over the Army Camp lands. 22 Were you involved in the investigation of 23 that incident? 24 A: Not with the investigation, no. 25 Q: Okay. And were you involved in any

1 way with policing activities in the area as a result of 2 that incident? 3 A: I believe I was present with OPP 4 officers at one point in time when they entered into the 5 Camp and were conducting a search for firearms. 6 Q: And do you recall why you would have 7 had occasion to accompany the OPP during that search? 8 A: Because I was a police officer. 9 Q: Right. Were you -- were you directed 10 by the OPP to do so? 11 A: Yes. 12 Q: Okay. And I also understand that you 13 attended a checkpoint on Highway 21 -- 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: With Constable Gerome Bressette 16 (phonetic)? Can you describe your activities at that -- 17 or the purpose of your being at that checkpoint? 18 A: Yeah, we were directed at the early 19 parts of the morning to attend the location on 21 Highway 20 and we were directed to make observation of anybody 21 entering or exiting the Army Camp, but not to stop 22 anybody. 23 Q: Okay. And who were you directed to 24 do -- to do that by? 25 A: I don't have my notes in front of me,

1 I -- I believe it would have been a sergeant out of the 2 Forest Detachment. 3 Q: Okay. And do you recall how long you 4 remained at that checkpoint? 5 A: From the time we arrived it was some 6 time in early morning of the same day. 7 Q: So, in total, how many hours would 8 you say you were there? 9 A: I would guess about six (6) hours. 10 Q: Okay. And can you describe why you 11 would have left the checkpoint? 12 A: We were directed to leave. 13 Q: By whom? 14 A: It was my understanding that Chief 15 Tom Bressette had spoken with the OPP and that we were 16 removed from that checkpoint -- 17 Q: Were you told -- 18 A: -- through -- through their 19 discussions. 20 Q: Okay. Were you aware of why Chief 21 Bressette would have done that? 22 A: No. 23 Q: Okay. And during that time was there 24 a lot of traffic along Highway 21? 25 A: Little to none.

1 Q: Okay. And where was the -- the exact 2 location of that checkpoint? 3 A: If you're familiar with the main 4 entrance to -- at the corner of 21 Highway and Army Camp, 5 I'm going to guess about one (1) mile east -- one (1) to 6 one and a half (1 1/2) mile east. 7 Q: Okay. I'm going to take you now to 8 the period when we understand that occupiers at the Camp 9 moved into the built-up area. We understand that 10 occurred on July 29th, 1995. 11 Were you aware prior to that happening 12 that people were planning to move into the built-up area? 13 A: No. 14 Q: Okay. You had described earlier a 15 meeting where the possibility had been discussed between 16 the OPP and Department of National Defence personnel. 17 At that meeting do you recall if anyone 18 there had any information that that might occur? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Okay. And how did you learn that 21 people had moved into the built-up area at the Army Camp? 22 A: I'm not sure if I became aware of it 23 at the first, whether I was on duty or when I attended to 24 work for the first time or again, off duty, or it just 25 happened.

1 Q: Okay. 2 A: Again, I apologize. I don't have my 3 notebook to refer to. 4 Q: We understand that that does make it 5 more difficult for you. And were you aware -- you became 6 aware at some point that people had moved into the built- 7 up area and that the military had left the Army Camp? 8 A: Yes. 9 Q: Were you involved in any policing 10 activities surrounding that development both with the 11 departure and the entry into the built-up area of the 12 occupants? 13 A: I don't believe so. 14 Q: Okay. To your knowledge were any of 15 your fellow officers at Kettle and Stony Point First 16 Nation involved in any policing activities? 17 A: No. 18 Q: Okay. Can you recall if you had any 19 communication with members of the OPP about this 20 particular development? 21 A: I'm sure we were briefed, you know, I 22 mean we work together and they would keep us informed 23 about what information they got. 24 Q: And -- but you weren't specifically 25 engaged? No one from your police service was engaged to

1 participate in the policing of that? 2 A: No, we weren't directly involved with 3 their operations, no. 4 Q: Okay. I'm going to take you now to 5 September of 1995. We understand that people moved into 6 Ipperwash Provincial Park on the afternoon of September 7 4th, 1995. 8 Prior to that happening, did you have any 9 information that the occupation of the Park was planned? 10 A: No. 11 Q: Were you on duty on September 4th? 12 A: I believe I was. 13 Q: And how did you learn that people had 14 moved into the Park? 15 A: I don't recall. 16 Q: Okay. At some point on September 4th 17 though, you did learn? 18 A: Yes. 19 Q: Was it the day -- the same day that 20 people went in that you learned that people had gone into 21 the Park? 22 A: I'm sure it would be. 23 Q: Okay. Were you contacted directly by 24 the OPP at any time concerning the entry of occupiers 25 into the Park?

1 A: I'm sure that we would be in 2 communications with them once that took place. 3 Q: Can you recall specifically the 4 nature of that -- those communications -- 5 A: No. 6 Q: -- or whether there were any 7 communications? 8 A: No. 9 Q: Okay. Prior to the entry of 10 occupiers into the Park, were you aware that there were 11 claims that there was a burial ground at Ipperwash 12 Provincial Park? 13 A: Yes. 14 Q: Can you describe the nature and 15 source of that awareness? 16 A: Other than -- there was -- there was 17 claims that there was a burial ground. That's about all 18 I knew about it. 19 Q: Okay. And did you learn that from 20 other community members? 21 A: Yes. 22 Q: And do you recall ever having any 23 conversations with Elders or people in the community of - 24 - of that stature concerning the existence of burial 25 grounds at the Park?

1 A: I'm sure I did. I'm sure I talked to 2 people about it, you know, I had no personal knowledge 3 that it was so but just from hearsay, media and I'm sure 4 conversations with community members that, you know, 5 that's how I acquired the information. 6 Q: Okay. And did you regard the Park as 7 part of the land that was formerly known as the Stoney 8 Point reserve? 9 A: I didn't know if that -- 10 Q: Hmm hmm. 11 A: -- was part of it or not. 12 Q: Okay. Did you have any involvement 13 in policing activities either on September 4th or on 14 September 5th, concerning the occupation of the Park? 15 A: Not directly, no. 16 Q: Okay. And did the OPP ever request 17 your involvement during that time period, September 4th 18 or September 5th? 19 A: I don't believe so, no. 20 Q: No. Did they ever ask for your 21 advice about how to deal with the occupation? 22 A: No. 23 Q: To your knowledge, was anyone at your 24 police service, at your Detachment, asked for advice 25 about how to deal with that situation?

1 A: I'm not aware. 2 Q: You're not aware? 3 A: No. 4 Q: Okay, taking you now to September 5 6th. Were you on duty on the evening of September 6th? 6 A: Yes. 7 Q: Do you recall when you may have gone 8 on duty? 9 A: I'm guessing five o'clock. 10 Q: So, you weren't on duty during the 11 day? 12 A: No. 13 Q: Okay. And that evening were you 14 driving a marked cruiser? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: And were you in uniform? 17 A: Yes. 18 Q: In relation to the occupation of the 19 Park, did anything of note occur that evening that you 20 can share with us? 21 A: Quite a bit that happened that 22 evening. 23 Q: All right, so if we could start at 24 the first thing of note that happened during your shift. 25 A: All right. I'm not sure when I

1 obtained this information, but I was aware that Gerald 2 George had reported being assaulted and I didn't know at 3 that time the location where he was assaulted -- 4 Q: Hmm hmm. 5 A: It was a -- the understanding it was 6 near the Army camp, the extent of his assault I don't 7 know. I understood that there was some object thrown at 8 his car and the First Nations policemen were not 9 investigating any issues involving inside the Army camp, 10 so it was an OPP investigation. 11 The latter -- as the evening went on, I 12 started hearing different types of communications over 13 the radio that I didn't understand. It sounded like 14 personnel moving into the area and like different blurts. 15 It was just -- it was uncommon, it's 16 something that I wasn't used to hearing. 17 Q: Was it the frequency? 18 A: It was the frequency and -- 19 Q: And -- 20 A: -- it was on the radio. 21 Q: Yeah. And how many -- how many 22 channels did you share? 23 A: There was two (2) channels -- 24 Q: There were two (2)? 25 A: Yeah.

1 Q: And they were -- and you shared those 2 with the OPP in the region? 3 A: That's correct, yeah. We had F-1 and 4 a F-2 channel. 5 Q: Okay. And it was on both of those 6 channels that you heard? 7 A: I heard most of it on the F-1 but 8 there was one particular thing that I heard and it was on 9 Channel 2 where I was parked on the beach, and I'm not 10 sure, 7:30, eight o'clock. It's -- I'm not sure of the 11 time. I still think it was daylight. 12 And I had just flipped it over to Channel 13 2 and I heard something to the fact that, do not shoot, 14 there's women and children or do not return fire; 15 something to that effect. 16 I thought that I had just intercepted a TV 17 program or something. 18 Q: And why did you think that? 19 A: Because, you know, total surprise, 20 you know. 21 Q: And did you hear over the radio after 22 that, any explanation for those comments that gave you 23 any enlightenment -- 24 A: I don't know about an explanation for 25 that, but again I started -- I was hearing different

1 transmissions -- 2 Q: Hmm hmm. 3 A: -- about a -- it sounded like 4 personnel being, you know, deployed to certain things, 5 you know, it's not your ordinary evening. 6 Q: All right. And were there -- in the 7 normal course, not on this particular evening, would you 8 expect to recognize most of the officers or all of the 9 officers communicating over those radio frequencies? 10 A: Yes, I would, yeah. 11 Q: And were there officers communicating 12 over those frequencies on -- on the evening of September 13 6th that you didn't recognize? 14 A: Yes. 15 Q: And was there a lot -- were there a 16 lot of transmissions of that nature? 17 A: I don't think there was a lot, but 18 there was -- the ones that I did hear, they were 19 unfamiliar to me what -- 20 Q: Hmm hmm. 21 A: -- what was going on. 22 Q: And other than the comments that 23 you've described earlier, did you hear any other 24 transmissions that gave you -- gave -- gave you cause for 25 concern about what was going on the area?

78
  1                  A:   Well, other -- other than that
  2   comment I just mentioned earlier, I was ordered to attend
  3   the Forest Detachment and I've never --
  4                  Q:   Yeah.
  5                  A:   -- I've never been ordered to attend,
  6   I was always asked to return or ten nineteen (1019),
  7   which is also return to the detachment and in this
  8   particular case I was ordered to attend.
  9                  Q:   Hmm hmm.  And I understand that
 10   happened after you heard the comment concerning women and
 11   children?
 12                  A:   Yeah, it -- it was later, after.
 13                  Q:   Okay.  And about how long after that?
 14                  A:   I don't know, it was dark by that
 15   time so I -- I'm going to guess an hour or so --
 16                  Q:   Hmm hmm.
 17                  A:   -- or I don't know.  There -- there
 18   was a lot of things.  I -- I wish I had my notebooks
 19   again to refer to.
 20                  Q:    Okay.  And were you told -- so, just
 21   to clarify, you received what you considered to be a
 22   direct order to attend at the Forest Detachment?
 23                  A:   Yes.
 24                  Q:   And who communicated that order to
 25   you?

1 A: The Com Centre. 2 Q: And you found that out of the 3 ordinary in terms of the -- how it was phrased to you? 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: Okay. And what happened next? 6 A: I attended Forest Detachment. 7 Q: And did you do that immediately on -- 8 on being ordered to do so? 9 A: Yes. 10 Q: Okay. Did you discuss that order 11 with anyone at your police service or anyone involved in 12 the First Nation prior to doing so? 13 A: No. 14 Q: Okay. And so you attended at the 15 Forest Detachment. Can you describe what you saw on 16 arriving? 17 A: I pulled up into the Forest 18 Detachment area. I observed a large trailer parked out 19 in the parking lot. I observed officers dressed in TRU 20 team uniforms and a lot of police vehicles present. 21 Q: Okay. Can you estimate the number of 22 officers that you could see? 23 A: I would estimate, when I first 24 arrived, maybe five (5) or six (6) outside of the office. 25 Q: Okay. And how many vehicles could

1 you see? 2 A: A lot. 3 Q: And you can't be more specific than 4 that? 5 A: No. 6 Q: And we do understand that this was 7 ten (10) years ago. Could you describe for us, if you 8 could, the uniforms that the TRU Team members were 9 wearing? 10 A: If I recall, they were a solid 11 colour, either dark grey or green. 12 Q: Okay. And were they wearing any 13 equipment other than clothing? 14 A: Vest and duty belts. 15 Q: Okay. And were they carrying 16 anything at that time when you arrived at the Forest 17 Detachment? 18 A: I'm not sure if all of them were 19 carrying, but some of them had long guns. 20 Q: Okay. And did you see any -- any 21 members that you would have taken to be members of the -- 22 the CMU; the Crowd Management Unit? 23 A: I don't know if I knew anybody in 24 that -- 25 Q: Okay. All right.

1 (BRIEF PAUSE) 2 3 Q: All right. And the officers that 4 you've described in those uniforms, why did you think 5 they were members of the TRU Team? 6 A: Because I've -- I was familiar with 7 what the TRU Team looked like at the time, other than the 8 colour of the uniform; I'm not sure if they were green or 9 a grey colour. 10 Q: Hmm hmm? 11 A: I believe they -- they'd be a special 12 unit other than the uniformed officer. 13 Q: Okay. And how did you become 14 familiar with what the TRU Team looked like? 15 A: Since I started policing -- 16 Q: Hmm hmm. 17 A: -- I've seen TRU Team -- 18 Q: Okay. You mentioned the -- the 19 incident involving Darryl George, were there any other -- 20 A: That's -- that was one (1); magazines 21 would be another one. They showed members of TRU teams 22 in magazines and -- and they all wear the same uniforms. 23 Q: Okay. These are magazines that are 24 specific to Ontario and -- 25 A: Blue Line -- Blue Line and things

1 like that, yeah, police magazines. 2 Q: All right. And they would depict 3 members of the OPP -- 4 A: Yes. 5 Q: -- TRU team? Okay. Did you enter 6 the detachment? 7 A: Yes. 8 Q: Okay. And before entering the 9 Detachment, did you speak to anyone in the parking lot? 10 A: I don't believe so. 11 Q: Okay. And you weren't stopped by 12 anyone? 13 A: I don't recall if I was or not. 14 Q: Okay. Can you describe what happened 15 when you entered the Detachment? 16 A: Well I walked through the garage 17 portion of the Detachment and as I walked in, I observed 18 three (3) community members laying on the floor and they 19 were in -- in a -- I call it a spread eagle position. 20 And I identified each one of them as 21 Roseanne Bressette, Deanna Bressette and Jeremiah George. 22 Q: I understand these three (3) 23 individuals are each related to Cecil Bernard George; can 24 you describe how? 25 A: Roseanne is Bernard's wife, Deanna

1 Bressette would be sister in law to Bernard and Jeremiah 2 George is Bernard's brother. 3 Q: And you knew all three (3) of these 4 individuals? 5 A: Yes. 6 Q: Very well, fairly well? 7 A: Fairly well. 8 Q: Okay, okay. Can you describe what 9 else was going on in the room when these individuals were 10 -- were laying on the floor? 11 A: If I recall, there was one (1) or two 12 (2) OPP officers standing over them. Roseanne made a 13 comment similar to, They shot Bernard or they beat 14 Bernard up. 15 Q: Okay. Did you say anything to her? 16 A: No. 17 Q: Did you say anything to Jeremiah 18 George or Deanna Bressette? 19 A: No. 20 Q: Did you say anything to the OPP 21 officers that were stand -- or officer that was standing 22 over them? 23 A: I may have asked him what did they 24 do. 25 Q: Do you recall if there was any

1 response? 2 A: I'm not sure. I think they said they 3 ran a checkpoint. 4 Q: Hmm hmm. Okay. Were those -- that 5 officer -- and I do understand -- we do understand that 6 this was quite some time ago and that does have an impact 7 on everyone's memory, do you recall if the officers were 8 -- or officer were doing anything other than standing 9 over the three (3) individuals? 10 A: When I seen them, no, they were just 11 standing. 12 Q: Okay. And what did you do next? 13 A: I walked into the main area of the 14 Forest Detachment. 15 Q: Hmm hmm. And what happened then? 16 A: I noticed quite a few people in 17 there. I noticed what I call white shirts, brass, the 18 higher levels of the OPP command -- 19 Q: Hmm hmm. 20 A: -- a lot of their officers, some 21 dressed in TRU team uniforms, others in regular uniform. 22 Q: Hmm hmm. And what was going on? 23 A: There was a lot of conversation. 24 Q: Hmm hmm. 25 A: And I just stood there for a while,

1 wondering what I was called in there for. 2 Q: Did anyone tell you why you were 3 called in there? 4 A: At one point in time, I'm not sure if 5 he was a Sergeant at that time, but I'm going to call him 6 Sergeant Stan Korosec, spoke to me briefly and then told 7 me what was going up -- what was going on up to that 8 point. 9 Q: Hmm hmm. Okay. And did he tell you 10 why you specifically had been ordered to the Detachment? 11 A: No, I -- to this day I don't know why 12 I was called down there. 13 Q: Okay. And I understand that at some 14 point at the Detachment, you saw a briefing? 15 A: Yes. 16 Q: Can you describe that for us? 17 A: Yeah. Mark Wright was giving a 18 briefing up to that point. He indicated that someone had 19 been shot, Dudley George had been shot and he was on his 20 way. I believe he might have confirmed that he was 21 deceased. 22 A second individual had been injured and a 23 third one had been injured. He named Nick Cotrelle and 24 Dudley George, but he did not name Bernard George as 25 being one of the injured at that time.

1 Q: Okay. And did he impart any other 2 information? 3 A: Yes, he -- he stated he wanted 4 officers to stand at each of the First Nations OPP 5 officers' house due to threats coming in and officer 6 safety issues. 7 Q: Okay. OPP First Nations officers, I 8 take -- did that -- was he referring to Kettle Point -- 9 A: I don't believe so, no. 10 Q: No? And -- 11 A: Because I asked him what about the 12 officers at Kettle Point. And he responded by saying, 13 what about them? 14 Q: Okay. So who would he have been -- 15 been describing? 16 A: I would believe officers that were 17 OPP officers and -- and not working on the First Nations. 18 Q: Okay. At the time were there any OPP 19 officers living at Kettle and Stony Point? 20 A: No. 21 Q: And what was your response if any, to 22 Detective Wright's comments to you? 23 A: I'm not sure if I said it directly to 24 him, if I said it out loud, or said it to myself, but no, 25 I'm -- I'm quite sure I told somebody. I'm not sure who

1 it was that I was going back to the Kettle Point 2 Detachment if they wanted anymore involvement of myself, 3 they would have to through Sergeant Bressette or Tom 4 Bressette at that time. 5 Q: Was that decision