DRUG SQUAD PROSECUTION TO RESUME

Stay Overruled

The prosecution of five former Toronto drug squad officers accused of
corruption will resume after the Ontario Court of Appeal overruled the
trial judge's decision to stay all charges because of unreasonable
delay.

The Court of Appeal also agreed with the Crown that a new trial judge
should be appointed to replace Superior Court Justice Ian Nordheimer
to preside over the case.

The three-judge panel stated that Judge Nordheimer made errors in his
January 2008 decision as to whether the Crown or defence was
responsible for the time it took for the case to come to trial. The
appeal court suggested it was unfair of Judge Nordheimer to comment on
the quality of the management of the case by the Crown.

"There was no unreasonable delay in this case. This complex case
proceeded at the pace contemplated and dictated by the parties," said
the court, about what has been called the largest police corruption
investigation in Canadian history.

The ruling means that the five officers will stand trial, likely in
2010, a dozen years after the original allegations surfaced that drug
squad units in Toronto were robbing suspects and falsifying aspects of
investigations.

The decision was described as "disappointing" by Patrick Ducharme, the
lawyer representing former Toronto police officer Ned Maodus. "This
has been hanging over their heads longer than it would for any other
defendant," suggested Mr. Ducharme.

Mr. Maodus, John Schertzer, Steven Correia, Joseph Miched and Raymond
Pollard were charged with a series of corruption-related offences in
January 2004.

The charges followed a 30-month investigation by a Toronto police
internal task force, led by then-RCMP Chief Superintendent John Neily.

Federal prosecutors stayed charges in at least 200 drug cases in the
late 1990s in Toronto because of concerns about the credibility of the
now disbanded drug squad.

After a lengthy preliminary hearing in early 2006, the heart of the
prosecution case against the officers related to four separate
incidents involving drug suspects.

There was also an allegation of an ongoing conspiracy between 1997 and
2002 to obstruct justice in five cases.

Judge Nordheimer observed that while there was a large volume of
information to disclose to the defence, it was not an overly complex
case.

The Court of Appeal made it abundantly clear in its 51-page decision
that it disagreed with this interpretation. More than two-dozen times
it referred to the case as complex.

"This was a very complex case. The long indictment included five
accused. It related to events over a five-year period," wrote Justices
Michael Moldaver, David Doherty and Marc Rosenberg.

The 13-month delay before a "difficult" preliminary hearing was
appropriate because "Crown and defence counsel needed time to
prepare," the judges stated.

What is not clear is how soon the prosecution will resume, since it
normally takes at least six months in Toronto to set aside court time
for a lengthy trial.

"We intend to proceed with the trial as quickly as possible, but the
precise dates for the new trial will be set by the Court," said
Brendan Crawley, a spokesman for the Ministry of the
Attorney-General.

Mr. Ducharme predicted that the case is unlikely to resume until the
fall of next year.

It could be early 2011 when a jury is selected, after the new trial
judge hears any pretrial legal motions.

[sidebar]

Timeline

National Post1997 A Toronto police sergeant informs a deputy chief
about numerous public complaints against certain drug-squad officers.
It is not clear if any internal action is taken.

1999 A group of Toronto defence lawyers sends a letter to the police,
alleging that drug squad officers stole money and jewelry from their
clients during raids. An internal investigation begins. At a later
court proceeding, one detective in the unit testifies that he
suspected the then-head of his unit of leaking information to a lawyer
for the drug-squad officers.

November 2000 Eight drug-squad officers are charged with stealing
relatively small amounts of money from the "fink fund" normally used
to pay informants.

July 2001 Toronto police chief Julian Fantino calls in RCMP Chief
Superintendent John Neily to head an internal task force into the
corruption allegations. An internal document released years later
indicated that this was done in part to reduce pressure for a public
inquiry.

February 2002 The "fink fund" charges are stayed because they could
compromise the ongoing task force investigation.

January 2004 Six Toronto drug-squad officers are charged with a total
of 40 criminal offences. This is despite a recommendation by Chief
Supt. Neily that there is sufficient evidence to prosecute at least
nine officers. May 2006 Five of the officers are ordered to stand
trial on a total of 14 charges, including conspiracy to obstruct
justice, after a preliminary hearing. A sixth officer is discharged on
the conspiracy charge, but ordered to stand trial in relation to one
incident where a suspected drug dealer was allegedly beaten and robbed.

January 31, 2008 Ontario Superior Court Justice Ian Nordheimer stays
all charges against the officers for unreasonable delay and criticizes
the Crown for a failure to explain the four years it took the case to
come to trial.

October 28, 2009 The Ontario Court of Appeal agrees with the Crown and
orders the prosecution to resume against five of the officers. The
appeal court upholds the decision to stay charges against Richard Benoit.