Delay could bring early end to RCMP disciplinary hearing
By Heather Polischuk, Leader-PostMarch 17, 2009
Source: Delay could bring early end to RCMP disciplinary hearing
REGINA -- The board overseeing a harassment complaint, leveled at one RCMP
member by another, took Tuesday afternoon to decide whether there was a
potentially fatal delay in the process.
Should the board — made up of three senior RCMP members — decide there was
undue delay, Cpl. Tim Korman and his lawyer, Richard Grounds, will have been
successful in getting the case thrown out, even before substantive evidence is
heard. The board is expected to return with its decision Wednesday. The
disciplinary hearing against Korman, charging him with contravening the RCMP Act
by harassing and sexually harassing Const. Laura Lehne (nee Affie), began on
Monday with a motion by Grounds that the case be thrown out because RCMP brass
took too long in deciding to proceed against Korman.
The board heard from three high-ranking members on the time limitation issue on
Monday and Tuesday — including now-retired Assistant Commissioner Darrell
McFadyen — who testified about their roles in dealing with Lehne’s complaint. She
alleged her former supervisor sexually harassed her while they were posted at the
Buffalo Narrows detachment in the summer of 2004 and continued to harass her in
a non-sexual way once she’d transferred to Turnor Lake, a Buffalo Narrows
satellite detachment.
Grounds noted several months passed between Lehne’s official complaint in
October 2005 and March 9, 2006, when McFadyen ordered an investigation.
Grounds then pointed out McFadyen’s decision to take action against Korman
wasn’t handed down until March 6, 2007, just days before the one-year limitation
period.
Grounds pointed to evidence that Lehne’s complaint was with McFadyen’s office
during the week of Feb. 13, 2006 — potentially meaning the then-commanding
officer would have been over the one-year period by his March 2007 decision.
However, McFadyen and human resource officer, Chief Supt. Garry Jay (who
testified Tuesday), each maintained McFadyen wouldn’t have read the complaint
prior to March 9.
“(Action) was initiated within the one year,” appropriate officer representative (a
position similar to the Crown in a criminal trial) Cpl. Jonathon Hart argued, adding
that case law determined the clock begins ticking only once the commanding
officer becomes aware of the complaint.
However, Grounds also argued that although McFadyen signed off on proceeding
against Korman on March 6, 2007, he didn’t send the matter to a designated
officer for initiation of discipline until April 4 — about a month past Hart’s argued
limitation period. Contrary to what Hart argued, Grounds said the designated
officer also should have been notified and formal discipline initiated within that
one-year period.
__________________
By Heather Polischuk, Leader-PostMarch 17, 2009
Source: Delay could bring early end to RCMP disciplinary hearing
REGINA -- The board overseeing a harassment complaint, leveled at one RCMP
member by another, took Tuesday afternoon to decide whether there was a
potentially fatal delay in the process.
Should the board — made up of three senior RCMP members — decide there was
undue delay, Cpl. Tim Korman and his lawyer, Richard Grounds, will have been
successful in getting the case thrown out, even before substantive evidence is
heard. The board is expected to return with its decision Wednesday. The
disciplinary hearing against Korman, charging him with contravening the RCMP Act
by harassing and sexually harassing Const. Laura Lehne (nee Affie), began on
Monday with a motion by Grounds that the case be thrown out because RCMP brass
took too long in deciding to proceed against Korman.
The board heard from three high-ranking members on the time limitation issue on
Monday and Tuesday — including now-retired Assistant Commissioner Darrell
McFadyen — who testified about their roles in dealing with Lehne’s complaint. She
alleged her former supervisor sexually harassed her while they were posted at the
Buffalo Narrows detachment in the summer of 2004 and continued to harass her in
a non-sexual way once she’d transferred to Turnor Lake, a Buffalo Narrows
satellite detachment.
Grounds noted several months passed between Lehne’s official complaint in
October 2005 and March 9, 2006, when McFadyen ordered an investigation.
Grounds then pointed out McFadyen’s decision to take action against Korman
wasn’t handed down until March 6, 2007, just days before the one-year limitation
period.
Grounds pointed to evidence that Lehne’s complaint was with McFadyen’s office
during the week of Feb. 13, 2006 — potentially meaning the then-commanding
officer would have been over the one-year period by his March 2007 decision.
However, McFadyen and human resource officer, Chief Supt. Garry Jay (who
testified Tuesday), each maintained McFadyen wouldn’t have read the complaint
prior to March 9.
“(Action) was initiated within the one year,” appropriate officer representative (a
position similar to the Crown in a criminal trial) Cpl. Jonathon Hart argued, adding
that case law determined the clock begins ticking only once the commanding
officer becomes aware of the complaint.
However, Grounds also argued that although McFadyen signed off on proceeding
against Korman on March 6, 2007, he didn’t send the matter to a designated
officer for initiation of discipline until April 4 — about a month past Hart’s argued
limitation period. Contrary to what Hart argued, Grounds said the designated
officer also should have been notified and formal discipline initiated within that
one-year period.
__________________
