June 2003 - Dudley George Update on Efforts to Bring Justice

[StoneyPointSupportNetwork]

June 2003

To friends and supporters of justice for Dudley George:

The Office of the Coroner of Ontario has denied an inquest into the death
of Dudley George.

Is that a surprise? After all, for almost 8 years the Ontario Government
has tried to cover up the facts of the events of September 6, 1995, when
Dudley George was shot by Kenneth Deane, an OPP sniper, on the traditional burial grounds of his people, the Aazhoodena Enjibaajig.

Some of these facts came out into the public during the trial of Ken
Deane,who has taken the fall for all these events. He was convicted of
"criminal negligence causing death", and was fired from the OPP. Other
facts have come to light in the many trials of Stoney Pointers who were
also charged that night. Only one person has ever served a day in jail for
the events of September 6, 1995, and that was Warren George of the Stoney Point First Nation, who got six months because an OPP officer twisted his ankle.

More facts will come to light during the upcoming public hearings in the
civil suit against Mike Harris and his henchman brought by some members of Dudley George's family. Those hearings are scheduled to begin on September 8, 2003. The defendents in this case have, at taxpayer expense, put every legal obstacle in the way of this civil suit - refusing to disclose information, threatening lawyers with libel suits of their own, and
dragging the process out as long as possible.Bob Runciman is one of the
defendents in this case, and is also the Minister of Public Safety and
Security, the Ministry in charge of the office of the Coroner of Ontario.

Since 1995, there has been a public inquiry into the OPP attack on OPSEU
strikers at Queen's Park, and into the deaths and illnesses of dozens
because of tainted water at Walkerton. But there has been no public
inquiry into the death of Dudley George, no public accounting for all the
factors that led up the political decision to send in the police that
night, and to give them license to kill.

Since 1995, there have been inquests into the deaths of people in police
custody, under house arrest, or in prison. But the Coroner never called an
inquest into the death of Dudley George. And so the question of why there
was no medical care for Dudley, why his brother and sister had to drive
him to hospital on a flat tire, why they were arrested at the hospital -
these questions may never be asked or answered in a public forum.

In September 2001, Pierre and Carolyn George formally asked for a inquest into the death of their brother. On May 5, 2003, Thomas Wilson, the Regional Coroner for the southwestern Ontario, denied their request. His letter, outlining his reasons, follows. Pierre George is asking for a
review of the decision of Thomas Wilson,. He asks you to write letters in
support of this review. You may focus on these points:

- There is tremendous public interest in these events, locally and
internationally, that is unabated since 1995.

- The provincial government and the police have resisted all forms of
accountability, including the criminal and civil cases that Wilson cites.
In particular, no level of government has called a full public inquiry.
The Office of the Coroner can not responsibly suggest that a public
inquiry would be a better forum for hearing the truth of these events,
without joining that call for a public inquiry in a meaningful way.

- In any case, an inquest would be the best way to examine the decisions
of the OPP and ambulance services, that led to a total lack of care for
Dudley George until his family members brought him to hospital 40
kilometres away.

- A jury should have the opportunity to evaluate the investigation of the
police in this matter and to make recommendations. While Thomas Wilson has decided, himself, to make a recommendation to the OPP, even that is not a public document.

- It is truly offensive for Thomas Wilson to base his decision in part on
the opinions of the Ontario Provincial Police Association, the organization which paid the legal expenses for OPP officer Kenneth Deane and backed him to the end.

Letters should be sent to Dr. Barry A. McLellan
Acting Chief Coroner of Ontario
26 Grenville Street
Toronto, ON
M7A 1Y7
fax: 416.314.4030

Please also fax a copy to Pierre George c/o the Ontario Coalition Against
Poverty at 416.925.9681.

If you have any more questions, don't hestitate to contact the Stoney
Point Support Network. You can reach us through Anti-Racist Action at
ara@web.net, 416.631.8835. Or, contact Pierre George at
carpierre@xcelco.on.ca. We are planning actions and public education
campaign for the summer and fall and urge you to get in touch if you would
like to contribute to this important cause.

Thank you,

Stoney Point Support Network

----------------------------------

The letter from Thomas Wilson to Pierre George

Regional Supervising Coroner
Southwestern Region
Unit "L", Unit 1-068
80 Dundas Street
London, ON N6A 6A8

5 May 2003
Perry Neil (Pierre) George

Dear Mr George

Re: Anthony (Dudley) GEORGE, DOD: 7 September 1995

I am writing in follow-up to our meeting at the SW Regional Coroner's
Office last Thursday, 1 May 2003, and our numerous earlier meetings and
communications.

I want to assure you that I have very carefully considered your request
for a coroner's inquest up to and including our discussions last Thursday
with Detective Mark Armstrong. At that meeting, Detective Armstrong shared
the contents of his investigation. He summarized his findings into a
41-page report, in which he documents what he learned of the events
between when your brother was shot and approximately 1 1/4 hours later
when he was pronounced dead. You will recall that the focus of Detective
Armstrong's investigation had been established by mutual agreements after
our earlier meetings.

I hope you will be able to take some comfort from the review completed by
Dr Andrew McCallum, an expert on emergency medicine, hired by the Office
of the Chief Coroner to review the medical events from the moment Dudley
was shot. Specifically, it appears that if Dudley had been taken by
ambulance, he might have arrived at hospital in Strathroy only two or
three minutes sooner than actually occurred, notwithstanding the
challenges you experienced getting him there in your private vehicle.
However, in the opinion of our expert, Dr McCallum, Dudley would have had
little chance of survival unless he got to definitive medical care within
fifteen or twenty minutes of receiving his injury, and, in the
circumstances, there was no way to get him to hospital in Strathroy, by
any means, within that time frame. You did the right thing in heading out
straight to Strathroy... the most sophisticated medical opinions, even
today, would say that "load and go" was a good choice, maybe the best
choice, and, given the circumstances of a brother and sister who wanted to
give their injured brother the best chance of survival in a situation of
chaos, uncertainty and the threat of further violence, perhaps the only
choice.

Detective Armstrong was able to establish an accurate explanation for your
being unsuccessful in your attempt to rendez-vous with or even see any
sign of an ambulance while you were traveling to Strathroy with your
injured brother in the back seat of your car. Moreover, detective
Armstrong was able to establish that there was a delay of three to five
minutes between when you arrived at the hospital and when Dudley was taken
inside the hospital for assessment and treatment. I will return to this
latter point further on in this letter.

I will not move on to address your request for a coroner's inquest.

I have determined not to call an inquest into your brother's death. In
will go on to explain my reasons.

Section 20 of the Coroners Act outlines what a coroner must consider in
making a determination of whether an inquest is necessary or unnecessary.
The coroner must begin with a consideration of whether holding an inquest
would serve the public interest. "Public Interest" in this context is
generally taken to mean whether the expenditure of time and resources
would likely provide the anticipated benefits of the public scrutiny of
the events around the death and whether the process would be successful in
addressing the public safety mandate, which is the underlying purpose of
any inquest. I believe the investigation completed by Detective Armstrong
has succeeded in providing the facts for parts of the events of 6-7
September 1995 that had never before been intensely investigated, and
these were identified by yourself as issues that needed further scrutiny.
I do not think an inquest merely to bring to light these additional facts
would serve the public interest. There might be recommendations that would
come from such an inquest, but I believe the recommendations could come
directly from the Chief Coroner, rather than from an inquest jury, and I
will elaborate on this point below.

Then, a coroner must consider whether the answers to the five questions
about the deceased person are known. The answers to the questions
regarding the death of Dudley George are known and established. We know
that Dudley George died of the complications of hemorrhage from a gunshot
wound to his chest, and that his death properly is classified as a
homicide

Next, a coroner must consider the desirability of the public being fully
informed of the circumstances of the death through an inquest. I am
satisfied that there has been a substantial public airing of the events
around Dudley's death through the various criminal proceedings that flowed
from the events that occurred on 6th September 1995, including, but of
course not limited to, the criminal charges against Kenneth Deane.
Moreover, I must consider that in the near future the civil proceedings
initiated by other members of your family are about to come into the
public hearings phase, which will further elucidate the events around
Dudley's death.

Further, to address the issue of whether or not a coroner's inquest is the
appropriate forum in which to inform the public, I must recognize that
many others, among them other members of your own family and the Ontario
Provincial Police Association, appear to hold the view that a public
inquiry rather than a coroner's inquest would be the more appropriate
process to fully inform the public.

Finally, a coroner must consider the likelihood that a jury might make
useful recommendations directed to the avoidance of death in similar
circumstances. the aspects of your brother's death Detective Armstrong
investigated were the events from the moment he was shot until he was
pronounced dead. The public safety concern elicited in his investigation
was the three to five minute delay at the Strathroy Hospital before anyone
assessed Dudley or took him inside to begin medical care. Although our
expert medical opinion is that such a delay made no difference to Dudley's
fatal outcome, no one present at the time could have known that to be the
case, including the OPP officers at the emergency department who
apparently focused their attention on arresting you, your sister Carolyn,
and xxx, the 14-year-old man who had traveled in the back seat rendering
first aid to Dudley.

In other, similar circumstances a delay of three to five minutes before
initiating definitive medical care might make all the difference. It is
likely an inquest jury would focus any recommendations on this critical
delay ad direct the necessary recommendations to senior officers at the
OPP. However, I believe the same benefit could be achieved by means of a
direct recommendation from the Chief Coroner to the Commissioner of the
Ontario Provincial Police that the 3-5 minute delay be subjected to
internal review, and policies and procedures be revised as necessary to
minimize the likelihood of similar delays in the future. I will ask the
Chief Coroner to make such a direct recommendation.

Mr George, I have carefully considered your request for an inquest. I want
to reassure you that my decision is not taken lightly, and implies no
disrespect for you or your family. I understand Dudley George's death to
be a tragedy and appreciate your sense of loss and grief to be profound.

Sincerely

Thomas Wilson MD CCFP MHSc
Regional Supervising Coroner SW