FORMER HARPER AIDE SAYS JAFFER SHOULD APOLOGIZE

OTTAWA - Most of Rahim Jaffer's Conservative caucus colleagues dashed,
squirmed, or told reporters to ask Ontario's Crown why their former
national caucus chair got a "break" - as the judge called it-from
prosecution on drunk driving and cocaine possession charges.

But Kory Teneycke, a former spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen
Harper, said Jaffer is the one who owes the public an explanation and
an apology.

"I think there are probably a lot of Canadians who are looking at this
story right now and wondering how is it that these charges could be
swept aside in such a manner," Teneycke told CTV. "It makes one wonder
sometimes if there isn't two levels of justice, one for high-profile
people and another for everybody else."

Jaffer's "break" from the justice system and a recent PEI airport
tantrum of his wife, federal cabinet minister Helena Guergis, are
politically damaging for the Conservatives unless the couple comes
forward and shows contrition for their behaviour, said Teneycke.

"This kind of stuff is toxic to the Conservative brand. It speaks to a
sense of entitlement and different rules applying, and I think it's
actually a very serious issue for the government at a political level.
This is watercooler talk. This is Tim Hortons talk. This is the kind
of stuff you've got to nip in the bud."

But Wednesday, after the national caucus meeting in Ottawa, most
Conservatives raced away from cameras and microphones, and declined to
comment.

Some expressed dismay at the questions.

Others, including ministers' Peter MacKay and Tony Clement repeated
the lines from the government Tuesday, that it was a matter for the
provincial prosecuting officials, and not appropriate for federal
politicians to comment on.

"It's the Crown who's gotta answer," said MP Dave Tilson, whose
Dufferin-Caledon riding takes in the courthouse where Jaffer pleaded
guilty Tuesday.

"I mean it's curious to go from a narcotic possession charge and an
impaired driving charge down to a careless charge which, most of those
- - I don't know - it's six points or something (off a drivers' licence)
plus a couple of fines. But I don't know the facts, I can't comment on
something I don't know anything about."

The Star, citing police sources, reported Wednesday that the more
serious charges were dropped because a rookie OPP officer failed to
follow proper procedures during a strip search of Jaffer, 38.

Prosecutors overruled the police in deciding the evidence would be
open to challenge, and possible exclusion at trial, under the Charter
of Rights.

Tainted evidence - or evidence obtained in violation of an
individual's rights - may sometimes be excluded as a remedy for the
rights breach. Or, as the Supreme Court of Canada recently ruled, a
rights violation may be addressed at the sentencing stage.

Ontario Attorney General Chris Bentley offered no further detail about
why Crown prosecutors did not bring all the initial charges to trial.

Instead, the Crown attorney dropped two charges, and accepted Jaffer's
guilty plea to a charge of careless driving, and a $500 fine.

The counts against Jaffer, a former Tory MP from Edmonton, simply
couldn't be proven in court, Bentley told reporters.

"I would ask you to consider the transcript in court. As I recall the
crown indicated, in the estimation of the crown the case couldn't be
proven in court."

Bentley said he knows the public speculation about why the case did
not proceed but "every case is a collection of facts, evidence and the
applicable law and it is not always capable to be sliced down to one
issue or not."

At the end of the day, the crown makes a decision, he
said.

"The decision has been made by the crown. I am interested, given the
public reaction I want to make sure there is nothing amiss. My
indication so far is the crown very responsibly and seriously
considered all the matters in this case," he said.

The chief prosecutor, Bentley said, has assured him that the crown
carefully and appropriately considered all relevant factors in the
case.

Since Jaffer is a public figure, a better explanation of what happened
is probably a good idea, Bentley admitted.

"I think the crown explaining more fully is probably an appropriate
issue to be raised," he said. "But the public should have confidence
in the administration of justice, regardless of who the individual is.
The decision is going to be the same, based on the facts and the evidence."

"I don't think that it's any of my business," said Conservative Sen.
Mike Duffy.

Queen's law professor Donald Stuart said when serious criminal charges
like these were withdrawn then a detailed explanation should have been
given in the courtroom, but added since that didn't happen then it's
up to Bentley to enlighten the public.

"There might have been good reasons for withdrawing (the charges) but
there does need to be an explanation," said Stuart, who went on to
criticize federal Justice Rob Nicholson for spouting tough on crime
rhetoric any other time but declining comment when it was a former
Conservative MP.

"I think there is a lot of hypocrisy going on in the federal
government," he said.

Meanwhile, Public Safety Minister Vic Toews office refused comment on
a letter signed by Toews that was published today by Canwest News.

The Toews letter, addressed to "Friends, colleagues and others,"
blames two reporters for a "smear job on behalf of the Liberals" in
their reporting on the Jaffer case.

Toews said their references to the judge's past Conservative
connections had nothing to do with the Jaffer matter, and that he had
told reporters that any decisions were up to the provincial
prosecutors' office.

"I believe the Liberal - the Liberal government in Ontario would be
responsible for that," Toews said Tuesday, and again in his letter.

"I certainly have no knowledge why the province decided to handle the
prosecution in that way. I suspect the decision was made because there
were flaws in the case involving the impaired driving and cocaine
charges initially laid against Mr. Jaffer and that a careless driving
charge was all that the facts and the law could reasonably support,"
Toews writes.

Judges rarely overrule sentence recommendations in plea bargains, and
certainly cannot reverse decisions made on charges that are never
brought before them, Toews notes.

He goes on to launch a bitter, personal attack on a Winnipeg Free
Press reporter.

With files from Tanya Talaga and Richard J. Brennan