Columnists
The case of the Peterborough puppy
Sometimes, you can’t beat an Ontario court case for old-fashioned drama—and value for money. Take this excerpt from the Reasons for Judgment of Justice Charles H. Vaillancourt in the case of Her Majesty The Queen and Michael Dennis Duffy. (Text in square brackets ([…]) has been added for context. The excerpt has been edited down.)
“Counts 9 and 10 read that Senator Duffy did defraud the Senate of Canada of money by filing [a] travel expense claim containing false or misleading information and that he did commit a breach of trust in connection with the duties of his office by filing [the] travel expense claim.
“Mr. Holmes [Counsel for the Crown] submits that the evidence at trial reveals that Senator Duffy and his wife went to the dog show in Peterborough, Ontario on the 3rd of July, 2010 “to make arrangements” to buy a puppy. Senator Duffy and his wife previously had purchased a Kerry Blue Terrier from a woman named Barb Thomson. The name of the dog was Ceilidh.
“[Senator Duffy’s diary] indicates that Senator Duffy drove to Peterborough on Friday July 2nd, 2010 and stayed at a Super 8 Motel. The next morning he met up with Dean Del Mastro and his wife for coffee. Thereafter the Senator attended what he portrayed as a “PA” (public appearance) at the “Cdn Kennel Club show and luncheon—Nicholls Oval, Peterborough.”
“Mr. Holmes acknowledges that amongst some of the Crown witnesses there was some confusion whether Barb Thompson attended the dog show in Peterborough in July 2010. The mystery was solved when Barb Thompson testified and said she didn’t attend that year, but had been a past participant in that dog show.
“Mr. Holmes stated that according to Senator Duffy’s testimony the purpose of the trip to Peterborough was to meet some “Christian broadcasters.” Senator Duffy further said that Dean Del Mastro had failed to make the necessary arrangements and so no meeting took place. Senator Duffy and his wife were dog fanciers. Mr. Del Mastro told them about the dog show. They attended the dog show where Senator Duffy discharged his parliamentary duties by visiting the booths.
“The Crown contends that the evidence shows that this trip was a window shopping trip to look at dogs, specifically at Kerry Blue Terriers and should not have been the subject of a travel expense claim.
“[The Defence argues] the evidence given by Senator Duffy indicates that Senator and Mrs. Duffy did not even know of the existence of the Peterborough dog show when they undertook the travel to Peterborough. Ms. Thompson was not present at and did not sell or solicit to sell a “puppy” to Senator Duffy at this dog show. In fact, Senator Duffy’s acquisition of a Kerry Blue Terrier from Ms. Thompson took place in January of 2011 in New Brunswick. Senator Duffy was at the same time trying to advance the case for funding for the Charlottetown Confederation Centre of the Arts in P.E.I. Mr. Del Mastro was in a position to help that particular project, being well-placed in Heritage and being, at that time, “part of the Prime Minister’s inner circle.” Senator Duffy’s meeting and discussion with [Mr. Del Mastro] was nonpartisan, representative, public business.
“I was most impressed by Mr. Holmes’ opening statement to the court when he said: “Counts 9 and 10, the Senator and his wife drive to Peterborough, they stay in a motel, they have coffee with Dean Del Mastro, then an MP, they go to a Kennel Club show, a dog show, and they arrange to acquire a puppy and they drive home. That is portrayed as public business, meet local officials on broadcasting issues. It’s in effect a shopping trip and it’s fraud.”
“The message was clear. It was said in a measured manner and tone. It seemed to be a very straightforward and uncomplicated proposition for the Crown to develop. Alas, these counts ebbed instead of flowed.
“I accept the evidence of Senator Duffy when he advised the court that he was not even aware of the dog show until after he had arrived in Peterborough and that he initially had gone to Peterborough to meet on a broadcasting issue. Although this meeting failed to materialize, he did discuss several non-partisan issues representing public business with Mr. Del Mastro. Thereafter, he and Mrs. Duffy attended the dog show.
“Mr. Del Mastro admitted that he could not remember specifically everything that was discussed at the meeting but did remember discussing the Economic Action Plan and an Internet communication system. This evidence demonstrates that this meeting was not just a coffee break. I believe Senator Duffy when he stated that he also did some lobbying for an arts project in P.E.I.
“I am not satisfied that the Crown has proven the guilt of Senator Duffy on counts 9 and 10 beyond a reasonable doubt and accordingly find the accused not guilty.”
For those who want to find out how the remaining 29 charges against Senator Duffy were dealt with, the entire Judgment (totalling more than 300 pages) is available online.
Comments (0)