Parents and teachers express concern for the country’s biggest school board

Guests: Kelly Iggers, Alexander Brown, Jasmine Moulton, Laurie French

SOUNDCLIP

[Sound of school bell]

VOICE 1: When it comes to keeping our kids safe, I won't take any unnecessary risks.

VOICE 2: Schools can safely reopen if community transmission is low.

VOICE 3: The best place for children is in the classroom. Our plan is for children and students to return to classrooms on September 8th.

[Sound of school bell]

DM: Today, we continue looking ahead to September and the return to the classroom with our ongoing series, No Easy Answers. Leaders across Canada are sounding confident about back to school plans, but Toronto District School Board, Canada's largest, and the Ontario government have yet to come to an agreement on the best way to keep students safe and provide a full education, leaving many Toronto public school parents feeling less than confident. Kelly Iggers is an elementary school teacher in the Toronto District School Board. Her daughter is also starting junior kindergarten in the board this fall. Hello.

KELLY IGGERS: Hello. Thanks for having me, Duncan.

DM: Less than three weeks till the start of school, but there doesn't seem to be a concrete plan yet in Toronto. So as a elementary teacher and your child starting in kindergarten, how are you feeling about this?

KELLY IGGERS: I'm just continuing to feel incredibly and increasingly frustrated, angry, disappointed and really incredulous at the inability of our province to put a safe and appropriate plan in place here.

DM: The Ontario Education Minister agreed last night to allow elementary schools to stagger the restart over two weeks. Is that going to make a difference?

KELLY IGGERS: At this point I don't see that there's any other option. But the issue there is that we shouldn't be in a position where we have to look at delaying the start of the year. We had the evidence and the expert advice many weeks ago telling us how to do this right. And the issue really is that our province has had failed to look to that evidence and expert advice and implement an appropriate plan from the get go.

DM: You started an online petition calling for smaller class sizes. It now has 230,000 signatures. What are you hearing from from other parents and teachers?

KELLY IGGERS: Just an incredible amount of support and agreement for these demands that the province implement a safe plan, which means looking to the evidence, look into the expert advice, and reducing class sizes.

DM: If smaller class sizes aren't approved, Kelly, have you considered not sending your child back to school? Doing online home schooling or home learning?

KELLY IGGERS: I don't think that's an appropriate option. I think that every single Ontario family needs to be offered a plan that meets an appropriate level of safety. The fact is, most Ontario families don't have that choice. It's really a very small number of Ontario families who have the means or the resources to support their kids at home with online learning or to turn to private options to support them. This plan is is inequitable in that it really doesn't provide a choice to most Ontarians.

DM: How confident are you that these issues are going to get resolved by the first day of school? I mean, we're very close.

KELLY IGGERS: It's at this point, it's getting to be, it's just an increasing disaster with each day that passes. And at this point, I. I can't see how we're going to have some sort of appropriate return in place for September 8th. I think that's becoming increasingly clear even to the school boards who have been working just incredibly hard all summer, pivoting at every turn because the province has been changing direction and giving new expectations to the school board. I have very little confidence that in the next two weeks we can have an appropriate plan in place. Virtually every stakeholder in education in Ontario is united and has been for weeks in demanding an appropriate plan with reduced class sizes. That follows the evidence. We have good evidence that countries who reduce class sizes return successfully. Well, we have the example of Israel where they returned with full size classes and went from daily Kaif count similar to Ontario, up to fifteen hundred and more daily. So we have education stakeholders across the province, school boards, principals, parents, Ontario Public School Boards Association, all for teachers unions, other education unions, our public health unit. All are united in demanding a safe plan with smaller class sizes. And so, again, the responsibility lies squarely with the government for failing to implement a plan that that follows appropriate safety guidance and I think that they're letting all Ontarians down.

DM: Kelly, thanks for joining us. Good luck as your get your daughter ready for this unusual start of her first school year.

KELLY IGGERS: Thank you so much, Duncan.

DM: Kelly Iggers is a teacher at a school in the Toronto District School Board. Her daughter's starting junior kindergarten this fall. The Toronto District School Board met yesterday to come up with a new plan for September. One it hopes the government will approve this time. Alexander Brown is the chair of the Toronto District School Board and he's in Toronto. Hello.

ALEXANDER BROWN: Hello.

DM: Where are we? What's the latest on the return to school plan after yesterday's meeting?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Well, our six hour marathon meeting yesterday brought us to the point where we are now, we need to consider the financial implications of the plan, the plan that was presented to us. There are three options in it for our elementary classes. What I can say is after the meeting, I felt as if we're being asked to replicate our schools as if they were pre pandemic. We don't know what size our classes will be except for the secondary. That's already confirmed, but the elementary question is looming large on everyone's mind.

DM: You mentioned the need for more funding. Ontario Premier Doug Ford says the board has access to extra funding, says there's been money offered for better ventilation, cleaning, and the government has met other demands from the teachers. But this is the time to be flexible. Is the board being flexible?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Oh, yeah. I mean, we've been pivoting at every turn. We've made every effort to follow the direction that the government gives us. We have an obligation to do that, but we also have an obligation to the parents and the kids in our schools and our teachers to ensure that they're safe. And we don't feel that the current situation with what we are looking at would provide the maximum amount of safety and so there is concern and I think we heard it from the teacher just before.

DM: Let's before the pandemic, there were rotating teacher strikes in Ontario. How much is this current tension with the government a holdover from that?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Well, I'm not going to speculate on that. There could be any number of answers to that. I think you'd need to speak to the union or the premier on that or the education minister.

DM: Well, we will we will be speaking with the Canadian Taxpayers Federation in a little bit and they're saying, they're arguing that the TDSB is wasting money. That if it got its spending under control, there'd be enough money to go back to school safely. What do you say to that?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Well, I'd be welcome to find out where we're wasting the money. Last year, we had to, we had a deficit. We had to find $70 million in savings on our budget. That was last year's budget. This year, we're now working on the COVID-19 budget, which is another deficit situation we keep getting put into. And quite honestly, every year we're put into a deficit. So if we're wasting money, then I guess we need to get the answers for that, but I don't believe that that's the case. We are fully aware of our finances and we're not wasting money. We have, you know, the ministry has allowed us to use our reserves. Those reserves are, I'm going to just be very clear, they call them rainy day funds. Ours are actually all earmarked for future purposes, but we are going to use them. We have no choice. And so that is the money we're going to be looking at when we decide on Thursday what our option is for the plans that we discussed last night.

DM: So another couple of days for waiting for plans. What do you say to parents in Toronto who are frustrated? There still isn't an approved back to school plan and we're just weeks away from the start of school?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Yeah, they're frustrated, they're angry and they're disappointed. I can only say that we are doing our best to ensure that number one, safety and the social distancing aspect of kids in the class, that is the number one requirement that we're trying to meet.

DM: How confident should parents be that this is gonna be, it's gonna be safe to send their kids back to school?

ALEXANDER BROWN: Well, they're going to know more about that, hopefully by the end of the week, when we are going to be able to offer them the options. And we will be sending out another preregistration questionnaire to find out who's coming back and who's not. I'm hearing a lot of parents saying they're going to decide on the day before September 8th what they're going to do. So we do need to hear back from them so that we can try to figure out the best configuration for all of our classes in our elementary schools if many people do opt to stay home. We might have naturally smaller classes through that attrition, but we do really want to get all of our kids back in the classroom. That's the number one goal. You know, there's a mental health aspect. They've been off school for four, five, six months and that's really what our goal is. Get them back together first, get them learning again and enjoying it.

DM: Lots to figure out still. Alexander, thanks very much for joining us.

ALEXANDER BROWN: You're welcome.

DM: Alexander Browne is the chair of the Toronto District School Board. We reached him in Toronto. There was frustration amongst some parents when the Ontario government rejected the TDSB's proposed back to school plan last week, but other people thought they made the right move. Jasmine Moulton is the Ontario director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, an advocacy group calling for lower taxes and government accountability. She's in Toronto. Hello.

JASMINE MOULTON: Hi, Duncan.

DM: You have suggested that the Tea DSB is wasting money. You heard Alexander Brown say the TDSB is not wasting money. Where's the waste?

JASMINE MOULTON: That's shocking that he says that because last year when the premier offered to fund line-by-line audits to help school boards find savings, only three of the province's 72 public boards, accepted his offer. And not surprisingly, the TDSB was not one of them. Look, the TDSB could have saved $53 million simply by opening their construction tendering to non-union. Meaning they could have saved $53 million by doing nothing, yet they voted against it. Yet the TDSB is saying it needs 20 million bucks to hire 200 more teachers to reduce class sizes due to COVID-19. So I think being to explain to parents, why did they pass on the opportunity to save $53 million by doing nothing? Opening their construction contract.

DM: The TDSB has asked, says this is about safety and originally asked for 2500 more teachers to be safe. Do you think that the government was right to reject that previous TDSB plan?

JASMINE MOULTON: Absolutely. Look, the TDSB is an extremely wasteful organisation. They don't need more taxpayer money to fund COVID-19 safety measures. They could cover the costs of those expenses simply by cutting the waste. And look, what's really been missing from this conversation so far is any consideration of the province's financial reality. Ontario is, Ontario doesn't have more money to give. We're the largest subnational debtor on the planet. Our debt's approaching 400 billion. And every single student in Ontario already owes $27,000 as their portion of that debt. We spend more on interest payments than we do on colleges and universities. So, frankly, more debt is a lasting thing that the province needs right now.

DM: But let's talk about the time that we're in right now. I mean this pandemic has led to unprecedented levels of public spending. There has been money to make sure that there that we can that small businesses can open so that we can go get our haircuts. So that bars and restaurants are open. Shouldn't the government just spend what's needed to make sure that every possible safety protocol is in place in schools?

JASMINE MOULTON: Look, Ontario is spending the most per pupil on its COVID safety measures in the country. We're the envy of every other province. Doug Ford has brought per pupil funding up to a historic high. He already spends more, despite what the unions will tell you, he spends more on education, public education than Kathleen Wynne ever did. We fund students at $12,500 per pop. So when Kelly Iggers is talking about an equity issue of, you know, people, people can't afford to homeschool their children, what if we gave education vouchers to parents at $12,500 a pop so that they could make the safest choice that they felt comfortable with this fall? Really, I think it's the issue of there's not a lack of funding for our public education system. There's ample waste and the TDSB has countless examples. I think your listeners will recall when the TDSB spent $150 to install a single pencil sharpener with four screws and $800 to hang three photos on the wall. Why would we dump more taxpayer money into a very wasteful system? You have to stop the waste and then fund it adequately.

DM: There are parents who are concerned about safety. They're concerned about smaller class sizes and the evidence internationally that smaller class sizes help prevent the spread of COVID. What do you say to parents who are waiting for a plan that will keep their kids safe this fall and are frustrated but that the arguments are about money?

JASMINE MOULTON: Look, if you want to talk about money, let's talk about the $720 million government wide raise that teachers accepted in April this year, while 2.2 million workers in Ontario either lost their jobs or were laid off. Teachers accepted a raise in April and like I said, government wide, it cost taxpayers $720 million. Yet the Ford government's investing $300 million on COVID-19 safety measures in school this fall. So I think parents should ask themselves, would they rather have spent that money to give a raise to already well-paid teachers or would they rather double up on the funding for safety measures this fall? This is the real question. The TDSB continues to peddle a false binary saying, you know, it's either more provincial funding or we cut French. But the reality is there's plenty of money going in to staff salaries. The TDSB spends 83 percent of all of its funding on staff, so wages benefits development. There's over a thousand teachers at the TDSB on the Sunshine List, and that list is growing. And they earn over a hundred thousand a year. And then when you also factor in the cost of their taxpayer funded pension contributions and benefits, top earning teachers at the TDSB make up.

DM: Jasmine, I'll jump in and thank you very much for sharing your perspective on this.

JASMINE MOULTON: Thank you.

DM: Jasmine Moulton is the Ontario director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. We reached her in Toronto. We did request to speak with Ontario Minister of Education, Stephen Lecce, as well as his deputy minister and parliamentary assistant. None of them were made available. Across the country school boards, unions, governments, parents and more are all weighing in on the plans for September, but some places are finding it easier to get along. Laurie French is president of the Canadian School Board Association and a school board trustee for Greater Napanee, Ontario, in the Limestone District School Board. Good morning.

LAURIE FRENCH: Good morning, Duncan, how are you?

DM: We were hearing about this struggle in Toronto to finalize the back to school plan. How settled are these questions in the rest of the country?

LAURIE FRENCH: Well, we've had the opportunity with the CSBA to speak with quite regularly our counterparts in the different provinces and understand how they're moving forward. And in fact, there are some areas of success and many areas with still multiple outstanding questions. You know, there's some teams with respect to how those plans are coming together in different provinces, in some provinces for, for example, that the school board develops their own plan, such as in Ontario and B.C. in the Northwest Territories. It's each school has their own plan. But other provinces like New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, the province is introducing the plan. And so there's common themes where we see variance across the country.

DM: You mentioned you mentioned B.C. It's being held up as a model of collaboration. What's the winning formula?

LAURIE FRENCH: It's exactly as you say, it is about collaboration. In that province what we've seen is continued levels of genuine and authentic collaboration, working in partnership with school boards and the government to come up with a plan. And I think that we really need to emulate that. We've still got time this summer to work on these plans and communicate for parents and staff that needs to come in partnership with that government and school boards planning.

DM: Everyone keeps talking about the plan, but where have the tensions generally been when it comes to making sure that kids are safe in school and agreeing on that?

LAURIE FRENCH: Well, I think some of the tensions are more practical as far as, you know, how we're seeing the use of masks. Absolutely, the controversy with respect to class size and the funding that would be required to change that. The resources that are necessary around transportation and cleaning and schools. It's not unreasonable to understand that there would be fear and many questions about all of those things, but that is the planning that needs to continue to happen in partnership with our public health experts.

DM: What kind of questions are you asking now that need to be resolved to make this transition go more smoothly for children in particular?

LAURIE FRENCH: Well, there's so many questions, I think, you know, much of it comes down to what are the communication strategies to be sure that our parents and our staff have the latest information. But at the national level, you know, there's larger issues that we have to consider. You know, that we have a national problem with respect to equity around access and, you know, some of the backup plans or the protocols with respect to online learning, we have significant inequity when it comes to marginalised rural and indigenous communities. So there are questions about that to be solved. Not to mention the long term widening of gaps around progress and achievement for kids.

DM: What advice would you give to parents and teachers as they're getting ready to head back to school right now?

LAURIE FRENCH: They need to continue to work with their school boards and have access to the latest information they need to stay open minded to to to work together and and work through those processes. There is so many new processes to implement, but continue to ask questions. That's the best way that we will get at a plan that responds to everyone's concerns and continue to adapt as as the situation evolves. We know we're going to need to be able to pivot when outbreaks occur and plans will change.

DM: What do you expect to see when, again, boards are forced to pivot, when the outbreaks occur?

LAURIE FRENCH: Well, I expect to see that, you know, the questions and the fears that we're talking about will certainly be there, but there will be continued direction from public health. Each community is going to have to respond, considering the local prevalence and what that means for the protocols that are in place. We've learned a lot in the health care system about how to work through different levels of outbreak and that's absolutely going to rely on our public health experts to help us and consider what's happening in each community and provide direction accordingly so that we keep our students and our staff safe.

DM: We'll leave it there. Laurie, thanks very much for joining us.

LAURIE FRENCH: Thank you.

DM: Laurie French is president of the Canadian School Board Association and school board trustee for the Limestone District School Board, representing Greater Napanee, Ontario. The CBC News is next and then we continue our presentation of the CBC Podcast, Uncover: Dead Wrong. I'm Duncan McCue and you're listening to The Current.

[Music]

CBC Podcast - Uncover: Dead Wrong – Episode 3

DM: Hi, I'm Duncan McCue and you're listening to The Current.

[Music: theme]

DM: Coming up, a story of one man's wrongful conviction in Halifax, a city plagued with more than 100 unsolved missing and murdered cases and a CBC Podcast search for accountability within Canada's most powerful institutions.

[Music: theme]

DM: Before we get to the podcast, I've got a correction to make. Yesterday in my interview with Joe Sacco, I referred to the Palestinian territories as Palestine. We apologize. My bad. Now, it's time for the next episode of the CBC investigative podcast, Uncover: Dead Wrong. The trial of Glen Assoun for the second degree murder of Brenda Way began on June 1st, 1999. But within days, the trial takes an unexpected turn and events begin to unfold that place Glen in an impossible situation. Here's host Tim Bousquet with the trial.

SOUNDCLIP

ROBERTA: I was working on Windmill Road. I was working the streets as a prostitute. And this guy picked me up on Windmill. He was driving a blue pickup truck with a white cap and two stripes down the back. He pulled over. I get in. I said, hi, how are you? He said fine. I asked him if he was a police officer, he said no. And he touched my back and he asked me if I'd give him a blowjob for $30. I said yes. He started driving out the highway and he pulled over just off the highway and I said, I don't want to be out the highway. He told me to give him his money back. I told him no, take me back. He punched me in the left side of the head or the face and told me to give him his money back. So then I gave him his money back and we drove out. He told me to take off all my clothes. We drove out to Burnside.

VO TIM BOUSQUET:

The woman you are hearing I’m calling Roberta. We’re not using her real name because she is the victim of sexual assault.

Burnside, where Roberta says she was taken, is a large business park, mostly warehouses and offices. It’s not far from the stroll in Dartmouth. On weekends and at night it is pretty much vacant.

Roberta said the attack happened sometime during the winter of 1996-97

ROBERTA: So we went out to Burnside and we went into this building. There was a shed in there and we went in there. He laid his keys on the table. We didn't have no clothes on at the time. And we went in the shed. He took a razor blade out and slit my nipple and my leg. He kept hitting me and told me to shut up or I'll kill you. And the name Pitbull, he said Pitbull and I looked at him. I don't know what made me say it and I asked him if he killed Pitbull. He said, yes and I'd be next.

VO BOUSQUET:

Roberta described her attacker as scruffy looking, with a beard and mustache. She was able to clearly describe specific details. He wore jeans and had a stud earring. And even though it was winter, he was wearing velcro summer sandals with thick wool socks.

Roberta said he kept her at the warehouse with her hands tied behind her back / and for 2 hours he beat her and raped her.

After he was finished, she said he drove her back to her home on Windmill Road.

ROBERTA: I went inside. I put flour on my cuts and I stayed in for the rest of the night. Ten minutes later, he'd come back with my jacket and it had a note in it. I'll kill you too, you bitch.

VO BOUSQUET:

Roberta put flour on her cuts to stop the bleeding. She did not report the incident to police / because she had an outstanding warrant for her arrest.

Soon after, Roberta moved to Ontario to get away from the streets and to try to get off drugs.

(beat)

About a year later, Roberta is watching the National News on TV.

REPORTER: In November of 1995, Brenda Way's body was found near a North End Dartmouth apartment building. The 28-year-old who had worked as a prostitute had been brutally stabbed. Her family was devastated. The community shocked. Now, nearly three years later, police are about to lay charges against this man, 42-year-old Glen Assoun, currently in BC.

VO BOUSQUET:

Watching TV, Roberta sees a picture of Glen.

She doesn’t know Glen and she doesn’t know Brenda personally. But she did know of Brenda and knew that her nickname was Pitbull.

She sees Glen. A scruffy man with a beard and moustache. A man accused of killing Pitbull.

Roberta is certain she is seeing the man who attacked and tortured her.

She contacts Halifax Police.

The case against Glen started to build one year after the murder / at the same time Cst Dave MacDonald of the Halifax Police took on the investigation.

Police found no physical evidence to link anyone to the murder. But a year in, Brenda’s sister Jane found a knife and witnesses began to appear.

As the Nova Scotia Crown prepares for trial, it is the witnesses that will form the most critical part of the case against Glen.

Before she was murdered, the Crown’s main witness, Robin Hartrick, testified at a preliminary hearing,// She said

she had seen Glen near the murder scene / at 4:15 in the morning. Glen’s Lawyer Don Murray cross-examined her.

MR. MURRAY: Can you tell us today how much crack cocaine you would consume 24 hours prior to, when you say you met Glen Assoun on the street?

ROBIN HARTRICK: An 8 ball.

MR. MURRAY: An 8 ball's worth.

ROBIN HARTRICK: Yeah. And that has no effect on my memory.

MR. MURRAY: OK. When had you last had some before you spoke to Glen?

ROBIN HARTRICK: 15 minutes.

MR. MURRAY: And was that at Linda's?

ROBIN HARTRICK: Yeah.

VO BOUSQUET:

Robin Hartrick is a problematic witness for the Crown. She was high the night of the murder / and other parts of her testimony are full of inconsistencies.

And what I find strangest about Robin’s story / is that Glen is walking up the sidewalk toward the murder site. There’s no blood anywhere on his clothes or hands. And, after Glen tells Robin “she’s finally gone”, Robin turns to Glen and asks him what time it is.

Preliminary trial cont.

MR. MURRAY: Now, one thing I gather that Mr. Assoun gives you this information, you don't say, wow, how do you know that? You never asked him that did you?

ROBIN HARTRICK: No.

MR. MURRAY: You never say to him, take me, show me. Maybe we can get her some help?

ROBIN HARTRICK: No.

MR. MURRAY: Because you were close enough friends with Brenda that if she was in trouble, she would want you to help her right?

VO BOUSQUET:

Don Murray would not get to cross examine Robin Hatrtick again. She was murdered before the trial started.

So the main task for the Crown Prosecutors / is to get Robin's testimony from her earlier videotaped statement / allowed at trial.

Glen wants lawyer Don Murray to be more aggressive / and fight tooth and nail to disallow the statement.

Glen knows Robin was lying. A split between Glen and Murray begins to fester.

(BEAT)

Justice Suzanne Hood hears the arguments, and then allows Robin’s statements into evidence.

The Trial begins - June 2, 1999.

(beat)

COURT CLERK - Mr. Assoun, please stand. Glen Eugene Assoun, you stand charged that you at or near Dartmouth, in the county of Halifax, province of Nova Scotia, on or about the 12th day of November, 1995 did commit second-degree murder on the person of Brenda Lee Ann Way, How do you plead — guilty or not guilty?

GLEN ASSOUN - Not guilty, I wouldn’t do something like that.

VO BOUSQUET:

In Nova Scotia, reporters can sit in on court trials / and record the proceedings for our own notes, but we’re not allowed to broadcast those recordings.

We can, however, ask for permission to access and broadcast the court’s official audio.

So that’s what I did. In Glen’s case, that meant the original trial judge, Justice Suzanne Hood, who is now retired, had to give her okay.

I wasn’t hopeful. After all, Justice Hood had presided over a wrongful conviction.

But she gave her permission for us to use the court audio for this podcast. I appreciate that.

There are hundreds of hours of recordings, and they’re amazing. I found myself listening to a court trial that happened 20 years ago. It sounded like a 1940’s radio drama, except it was real, and it had devastating consequences for Glen Assoun.

You’ve been selected, ladies and gentlemen, as the jury, which will consider the case of Her Majesty the Queen v Glen Eugene Assoun.

VO BOUSQUET:

That’s Justice Suzanne Hood.

This case has two crown prosecutors, Ron Fetterly and Dan McRury.

In his opening statement, Fetterly spells out the case against Glen:

The Crown will present evidence to suggest Brenda Leanne Way and Mr. Assoun had been in a relationship for some period of time. The relationship itself had some conflict and had resulted in the parties going their separate ways. Ms. Way had been a prostitute for some period of time in the local area and she was known to be a drug user.

After this point in time, although there was contact between the parties, the Crown will lead evidence that Ms. Way had moved in with a number of other people. On the evening of her death, the Crown will call a number of witnesses who will testify about the movements of the victim throughout the city while she conducted her business as a prostitute.

Crown will present evidence before you in the form of verbal testimony from a now deceased witness, who was also a prostitute, to say that at 4:15 in the morning she saw the accused, Mr. Assoun, whom she knew, outside on the sidewalk across the location where the body was found. At that point in time, Mr. Assoun knew that Ms. Way was gone for which she took to mean deceased, and this was several hours before the body was discovered.

The Crown will also present evidence from a number of individuals who will testify that at various times Mr. Assoun acknowledged or admitted to them that he had killed Brenda Way.

VO BOUSQUET:

The first witness is Wayne Wise - Glen’s own nephew.

Wise was a career criminal and on February 4th, 1997, Wise was being taken to jail by two police officers. He was facing fraud charges.

On his way to jail, Wise told the police that a couple of weeks before, he had called his uncle Glen, out west, to see if there was any work. And during that conversation, Wise said that Glen told him he had killed someone.

Here’s Wise being questioned by Crown attorney Dan McRury.

McRury starts by reading Wise’s criminal record, I assume to get that out of the way.

MacRury: Now, Mr. Wise, you do have a criminal record?

Wise - Yes, I do.

MacRury - You were convicted in 1983 of possession of stolen property.

Wise - Yes.

MacRury - You were convicted of assault in August 15th of 1988.

Wise - Yes.

……………..fade out

VO BOUSQUET

The list is lengthy, five pages long. By my count, there are 26 convictions ranging from theft over $200 ~~and driving while impaired /~~ all the way up to fraud and assault.

and fade back in.

MacRury - And how did you come to testify at this trial?

Wise - It was a Canada-wide warrant was issued and I was arrested to appear.

1999_06_02_Wayne Wise

[00:00:26]

MacRury - OK. And tell me what happened.

Wise - I was planning to move out west and there was no work here. So I had attained Glen's phone number and called ~~and.~~

MacRury - OK. Can you tell me about the conversation?

Wise - Well I asked if there was any work there and I asked him what, first of all, what he was doing there. He said he was hiding.

MacRury - OK. And then what, what was said?

Wise - Well I asked why. And said that he's a suspect in a murder investigation. And the subject changed to is there any work out there?

MaccRury - And what else was said?

Wise - I asked him if he did it and he said yes.

VO BOUSQUET

Glen’s Lawyer Don Murray takes over on cross examination. He begins with questioning Wise on 2 fake identities Wise had used in the past in order to mislead police.

Murray also points out several drunk driving convictions / and Wise agrees that he is an alcoholic / and that he was using crack cocaine / on the day he claims to have called his uncle.

Murray questions Wise about how he came to Halifax from Alberta, to testify for the Crown.

Murray - Okay, now prior to your arrest in Alberta, did you have occasion, during the month of May, 1999, to call my Friend, the Crown Prosecutor?

Wise - I spoke with them, yes.

Murray - All right. And did you make demands to them about flying your family out here as well as yourself if you were to testify?

Wise - I inquired about it, yes, I did.

Murray - No, did you demand it?

Wise - I inquired about it.

Murray - Okay, so you asked if they might be kind enough to do that?

Wise - That’s right.

Murray - And did the Crown agree to do that for you?

Wise - Yes, they said they would.

Murray - And then did you threaten to ~~forget or~~ forget your evidence if the Crown didn’t meet other demands?

Wise - My demands were simple. I wanted to come out the third week of June.

Murray - Uh hmmm.

Wise - And, yes, I did threaten that.

VO BOUSQUET:

Don Murray asks Wise about when he first told his story to police.

(12:28)

Murray - Okay, now perhaps you could tell the Jury when is the first time you mentioned anything to anybody about having had this telephone conversation with Uncle Glen Assoun in January of 1997?

Wise - I first mentioned it when I was getting a ride to the Halifax Correctional Centre with the police.

Murray - Uh hmmm.

Wise - The police that were investigating my...investigating my fraud charges that I got convicted on and they were the first to know.

(15:04)

Murray - Uh hmmm. Did it cross your mind that it might be handy to tell these guys about it because it might have helped in your current situation?

Wise - I don’t think so.

Murray - You don’t think so?

Wise - No I don’t.

Murray - Just thought you’d be public spirited, right?

Wise - That’s right.

VO BOUSQUET

About a week or two after Wise told police his story, he was visited in jail by Lead Investigator Dave MacDonald.

About a week after that, Wise is taken from jail to the Dartmouth Police station to give his statement.

He is there with Dave Macdonald, MacDonald’s partner Cst. Mike Spurr and - one other person. Wise’s girlfriend, Carla.

Murray - Oh? And when did you see her at the Dartmouth Police Station?

Wise - On February 25th.

Murray - Oh, the same day that you gave your statement to David MacDonald?

Wise - Correct.

Murray - All right. And when you met with her at the Dartmouth Police Station was it behind glass or did you have - did you go into a room together?

Wise - We were in a room ~~together.~~

VO BOUSQUET:

Murray goes on to establish that before giving his statement to Dave MacDonald Wise didn’t have any contact visits with Carla. A contact visit is where you can be in the same room together and, well, touch. But Wise and Carla had a contact visit that day, and would have more in the future.

(beat)

To my ear, based on Murray’s cross examination, Wise doesn’t come across as a very reliable witness.

And Murray seems to be doing a good job.

But Glen sees it differently. He was already angry that Robin Hartrick’s recorded testimony was allowed / and he knows Wise is lying.

Glen doesn’t think Murray is doing all he can.

On June 4th, just 2 days into the trial Glen stands to address Justice Hood.

He states that he is fighting for his life / and his only chance of being found innocent is to fire his lawyer and represent himself.

Justice Hood calls to adjourn / so Glen can think about his decision.

(beat)

Over the weekend Glen quickly comes to his senses and realizes he needs a lawyer. On Monday he tells the court “a man who represents himself has a fool for a client.”

Glen asks for more time and Justice Hood gives him until Wednesday.

It’s hard for Glen financially / and to make calls from jail, but he does manage to find one lawyer in time for the deadline.

On Wednesday, that lawyer asks for more time so he can prepare / because he also has other cases. Both the crown and the judge make concessions to accommodate him.

But Glen, who is sitting in court, is not satisfied. He feels rushed. He tells the lawyer it’s not enough time.

Glen, once again, says he will represent himself.

Hood gives Glen 2 and a half months to prepare ~~and/~~or to find a new lawyer.

The trial starts again on August 23, 1999

The very first day / Glen runs into trouble. He finds he’s in way over his head.

ACT III

VO BOUSQUET:

Glen Assoun- Ms. Cameron, do you know a person by the name of Wayne Wise?

Tina Cameron- Yes, I do.

Glen Assoun - How is it that you know Wayne Wise?

Tina Cameron - I know his girlfriend, Carla.

Glen Assoun - His girlfriend Carla?

Tina Cameron - Yes.

Glen Assoun - Do you also know Jane Downey?

Tina Cameron - Yes.

VO BOUSQUET:

That these three witnesses know each other raises questions. Glen, for one, thought they had conspired against him.

Another thing is Tina Cameron’s testimony. She said that she just happened to be going to the Dartmouth police station / with her friend Carla in 1997. And when she got there, Wayne Wise, Carla’s boyfriend was with Cst. Dave MacDonald giving a statement. and Tina Cameron decided right then and there / she too had a witness statement for MacDonald.

Tina said that a year and a half earlier, she overheard Glen saying he got Brenda from ear to ear with a knife / and the tip broke off.

Remember it was a psychic / who told Jane Downey that Brenda was killed with a knife / with its tip broken off.

Glen grills Tina as to why she would keep this to herself / for 16 months.

Glen Assoun - Well, after hearing a conversation like that, I mean, if it was me, my first thing that I would do would be to go home and call 911, because I’m just putting myself in your shoes for a minute, I have small children and there’s a crazy man running around. You know, a man that just allegedly admitted to a crime. But you do nothing with that. You do nothing with that in 1995. You did nothing with it in 1996.

~~...~~

Cameron - Yeah, but I didn’t want to get involved.

VO BOUSQUET:

But Glen soon stumbles in his cross-examination. It derails with a series of corrections from the judge and objections from the prosecutors.

1999_08_23_TinaCameronCross_Pt2

[00:00:12]

ASSOUN: Okay, well your Honour, I guess I can leave that question alone for now.

[00:00:19]

The Court: You’re not going to ask it? I mean I’m...you don’t have to ask it.

[00:00:21]

GLEN ASSOUN: Well, I’ve asked the question.

[00:00:22]

The Court: And are you satisfied with what she said to you.

[00:00:24]

GLEN ASSOUN: No, I’m certainly not. No. I’m not satisfied with anything the woman is saying.

[00:00:25]

Mr. MacRury: Objection, My Lady.

[00:00:27]

The Court: No, you can’t….

[00:00:30]

Mr. MacRury: You can’t give editorial comments on….

[00:00:34]

GLEN ASSOUN: Okay. I’m sorry. I…...

[00:00:37]

The Court: Yeah. When you say you’re satisfied with her answer, you’re not going to pursue this line of questioning any further is what I mean.

[00:00:43]

ASSOUN: Not at this present time because it’s just going in circles.

[00:00:53]

Mr. Fetterly: Well, I don’t want Mr. Assoun to be intimidated by the Crown objecting. It’s simply we’re….we’re objecting to the phrasing of the question and the manner in which the witness responded. I mean there is a way to answer...to ask the question to….

before Roberta was attacked in Dartmouth.

The crown suggested that Glen got a discounted flight from BC to Halifax with the help of his brother-in-law, who worked for Air Canada, came to Dartmouth, got a truck, attacked Roberta, and then flew back to BC. There was no evidence for this — no flight records, no witnesses, and Glen somehow made this trip with no one knowing about it.

But Glen didn’t know how to argue against this.

Glen, the crown, and the judge would wrangle over the crown’s objection for the next 15 minutes.

(16:20)

Hood - ~~Yes. And the other thing you have to~~ — you know, I think you have to realize at some point — I mean, ~~you~~ — on TV, the witness always breaks down on the witness stand and says Yes I lied. I’ve never seen that happen.

what you’re hoping to achieve is to get her to say, I made the whole thing up. And even if she did, the chance of her saying that in this courtroom are just about zip, because I’ve never seen it happen.

Glen Assoun - You’ve got more of a chance of getting hit with a Soviet satellite.

Hood - ~~And~~ leave with the jury the thought that the person wasn’t a very reliable witness. That’s the objective of cross-examination. Not to get the witness to break down and say I’m lying. I mean, it just never — maybe before I retire it will happen, but I haven’t seen it yet. ~~So with those, I guess, what I hope might be —~~

Glen Assoun - Well, I hope to get to the bottom of this, Your Honour, before you retire, with all due respect. And to the truth.

Hood - Oh, I hope this trial will end before I retire.

Glen Assoun - Yeah.

[laughter in courtroom]

VO BOUSQUET:

Glen proceeds with the / desperation of a man fighting for his own freedom.

He knows no rules of evidence. From his jail cell, he cannot properly prepare. He can’t do basic research, access the phone, locate people / or gather the court forms to subpoena them.

What is about to happen to Glen is predictably disastrous.

The next morning, Friday, the trial resumes. And Glen’s frustrations / lead to the most shocking moment of the trial.

R v Assoun 1999_08_27_10h_03m

McRury - The crown calls Cst. Williams

Glen Assoun - Back in June, I told the court that I’m wrongfully imprisoned —

Hood - Mr. Assoun, you’re not to address the jury —

Glen Assoun - there’s so much being hid from you that you —

Hood - take him out of the court, take him out.

Glen Assoun - there’s too much — there’s too much being hid — I asked for a lawyer and they would not give me one.

[crosstalk and noise]

VO BOUSQUET:

NEW VO:

Glen is detained by two sheriffs.

One grabs him / while the other holds his hand over Glen’s mouth / as they drag him across the floor and out of the courtroom...

In front of the very jury that would ultimately determine / his guilt or innocence.

(continued from above)

Hood: We’ll adjourn until Mr. Assoun is back in the courtroom. Sorry.

ACT IV

NEW VO:

Glen is put into a cell at the courthouse for about an hour / and then is brought back up.

As Glen is being read the riot act by Justice Hood, he once again argues that he needs a lawyer. But this time, he also points at the police investigator / sitting in the courtroom.

1999_08_27_framed

Glen Assoun- I can’t get to the truth without a lawyer, Your Honour.

Hood - You’ve said that.

Glen Assoun - There’s corruption here and I know it. ~~This case pertains to the David Milgard case.~~ I’m wrongful in prison. These people printed stuff in the paper yesterday. I had my life threatened last night, several times. I had to sign a paper at the correctional centre stating that they’re not responsible for my life if I get beat up or killed in the correctional centre. I had to be put in protective custody.

Hood - And that would be different if you had a lawyer?

Glen Assoun - They had no right printing that. That was fabrication —

Hood - You —

Glen Assoun - I proved that girl was lying.

Hood - Mr. Assoun, you’re talking about two different things.

Glen Assoun - No, I’m talking about the same thing. I’m talking about corruption and this man here framing me.

Hood - You’re not —

Glen Assoun - And he knows it.

Assoun - David MacDonald.

Hood - You’re not discussing whether or not you need a lawyer or have a lawyer or how you’re conducting your case. And I’m telling you that you are not to address this jury.

VO BOUSQUET:

Glen thought Dave MacDonald’s case was built on lies and collusion.

(beat)

The crown calls more witnesses.

David Carvery is a witness who comes forward after Glen was arrested. Carvery was in jail at the same time as Glen. Carvery claims Glen told him that he murdered his ex-girlfriend.

David Carvery is a friend of Jane Downey’s boyfriend.

Carvery didn’t call police about this. He called Jane Downey, who then called Dave MacDonald.

There had been 3 connected witnesses. Now there are 4.

Carvery was facing drug charges and more jail time / but he makes a deal with the Crown / for his testimony.

Instead of six years, he serves just 5 months.

(beat)

And here is Jane Downey, ~~also a crown witness,~~ with Glen cross examining her.

1999_09_01_psychic

[00:00:12]

Glen Assoun - Ms. Downey?

Jane Downey - Yes.

Glen Assoun - Did you talk to a psychic

Jane Downey - Yes. Not at a shower but I have talked to one, yes.

Glen Assoun - Okay.

DOWNEY: In my own home.

GLEN ASSOUN: Oh, in your own home.

DOWNEY: Yes.

[00:01:53]

Glen Assoun - And the psychic told you that she thought your sister was killed with a knife with a broken tip, is that correct?

Jane Downey - Yes.

Glen Assoun - And, how did you come to find this knife?

Jane Downey -I was walking normally over to my father’s, and like I said, I walked on the path. I stumbled on something. I checked. Moved some moss and grass and up stick the handle. I picked it up and went to my father’s and called the city police and turned it in to them.

[00:03:36]

Glen Assoun - Don’t you find that a little coincidental? You talk to a psychic, she tells you this and then all of a sudden you find a knife?

Jane Downey - No, not exactly.

Glen Assoun - You don’t find that coincidental?

Jane Downey - No.

Glen Assoun - Were you aware that the day that they found your sister’s body, the 12th of November 1995, the RCMP had a tracking dog in there and searched the area and they found nothing?

Jane Downey - Nope.

Glen Assoun - Were you aware that the police did several searches of the area on foot and found nothing?

Jane Downey - They do that in most investigations.

Glen Assoun - But I’m asking you, were you aware of that?

Jane Downey - I have not seen it with my own eyes, if you want to know. No.

Glen Assoun - In fact there were several searches of the area by several policemen, also a…..

Suzanne Hood - Mr. …. Mr. Assoun.

Glen Assoun - Tracking dog.

Suzanne Hood - Mr. Assoun. That’s not in evidence.

Glen Assoun - Pardon me?

Suzanne Hood - That’s not in evidence. You’re…..

Glen Assoun - It’s in the police report, your Honour.

Suzanne Hood -But that’s not in evidence. You’re putting something into evidence in questioning this witness that I don’t recall being in evidence up till now.

Glen Assoun - Well, I think it’s very important, Your Honour.

Suzanne Hood -Well, then somebody should put - then you should - you might want to consider somehow getting into evidence. But you can’t get it into evidence by asking this question.

Glen Assoun - How can I get it into evidence, Your Honour?

Suzanne Hood - We can discuss that in the absence of the jury.

Glen Assoun - Okay thank you.

Suzanne Hood - When you finish with this witness.

Glen Assoun - Why was it when I asked you earlier if you talked to a psychic….(fade out)

VO BOUSQUET:

But they never did discuss how to put that important information before the jury.

Glen could not get the tracking dogs into evidence.

And let’s consider that knife.

There was no blood on it, no fingerprints, no DNA — nothing to connect it to Glen or the murder. But the knife was admitted / as evidence at trial.

(beat)

Glen starts calling his witnesses on September 7.

Ann Morse is his alibi for the night of the murder. Ann says she was with Glen all night.

But on cross-examination crown prosecutor Roger Fetterley questions her memory. He gets Ann to admit that she takes / prescription medications and those can affect memory.

Another witness for Glen is Linda Grandy. We met Linda in episode 1. She was the sex worker who knew Brenda Way.

Linda, not even knowing why she is called as a witness, contradicts Robin Hartrick’s testimony. Robin had said she was with Linda at Linda’s place at 109 Albro Lake Road just before Robin said she saw Glen at 4:15 am. Linda Grandy testifies she didn’t live at 109 and she doesn’t even know Robin Hartrick.

But the Crown goes really hard on Linda and tries to discredit her because of her drug use.

Crown: Ms. Grandy, as you indicated, you’re presently serving time for selling drugs. Is that correct?

Grandy: Yes.

Crown: And when you were at 109 Albro Lake Road, you sold drugs out of that address. Isn’t that right?

Grandy: No, I did not.

Mr. Assoun: Objection, Your Honour. May I remind the Crown that Ms. Grandy’s not on trial here.

VO BOUSQUET:

It’s interesting that the Crown tried to discredit the testimonies of both Ann Morse and Linda Grandy because of drug use, but fully accepted the stories of Robin Hartrick and Wayne Wise who were also drug users.

(beat)

Closing arguments to the jury were given on September 14. First we hear from the Crown:

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, was it coincidence or misfortune that Mr. Assoun, the same person with a motive,

VO BOUSQUET:

Now let’s hear from Glen:

[00:00:03]

Glen Assoun - Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I’m not a lawyer, and I don’t know anything about summations to a jury. I learned from my family in 1998, April 1998, there was a Canada-wide warrant out for me. I turned myself in to the RCMP in British Columbia. I turned myself in to get to the bottom of this and to the truth.

Suzanne Hood - Mr. Assoun, I’m sorry, it is not normal to interrupt somebody’s closing, but you’re giving evidence.

Glen Assoun - I don’t mean to, Your Honour.

Suzanne Hood - You are. Start with what the witnesses in the Courtroom said, please.

Glen Assoun - Sorry.

Suzanne Hood - I would ask the jury to disregard Mr. Assoun’s just-made comments, please.

Glen Assoun - The first issue is Robin Hartrick’s statement. She gave a statement to the police November 14, 1996, a year after Brenda was killed.

After misleading the police for a long period of time in that interview, the police got fed up with her, and were going to escort her out of the station. Robin gets upset and says, well, I guess you don’t want to hear about me meeting Glen Assoun out in front of 109 Albro Lake Road the night Brenda Way was killed.

Then she goes on with her story. She claims that she left Linda Grandy’s at 4:15am, then ran into me. She was supposed to have a short conversation with me. Then she said she went to Lloyd States at 8 Lawrence Street, apartment 111.

She says she arrived at Lloyd States at 7a.m. in the morning. Mr. States was supposed to tell Robin that Brenda was dead at 7 o’clock in the morning, and he seen it on the news.

Brenda Way’s body wasn’t found at 7:30a.m. It’s impossible. There was no news release until much later that day. No name was given until the 13th of November, 1995.

VO BOUSQUET:

Glen went on to talk about the issues raised by Linda Grandy.

Glen then turned to the witnesses who knew each other, and who testified against him:

[00:10:48]

Glen Assoun - Wayne Wise is also a friend of Tina Cameron’s. May I have a drink of water, please? Jane Downey, the sister of Brenda Way, is talking to a psychic around September, 1996. This psychic was supposed to tell Jane Downey all kinds of things about her sister, Brenda Way, on how she was killed and things like that.

Six months later after Jane Downey finds a knife with a broken tip, Tina Cameron says she allegedly heard a conversation about Brenda being cut from ear to ear, and something about a broken-tipped knife.Now, Jane Downey and Tina Cameron also know each other.

VO BOUSQUET:

But as he continues with his closing statement, Glen once again gets tripped up by giving evidence.

Glen tries to tell the jury that jailhouse informant David Carvery stole his paperwork while they were in jail together. Justice Hood stops him.

Glen tries to tell the jury he was in BC when Roberta was attacked by someone saying he killed Pitbull. Justice Hood stops him again.

So Glen gives up on trying to talk about the evidence against him. He wraps it up:

Glen Assoun - Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, my life is in your hands right now. I ask you please don’t let a miscarriage of justice happen.

The Crown has not met a burden of proof. There’s no forensic evidence, and there’s no physical evidence. It’s just hearsay, he-said/she-said, and alleged confessions.

I fought these two men here the best I could, all the way through this trial. The reason I did fight them is because I am innocent.

I’m not claiming to be no angel because I’m not. I’ve made mistakes in my life, plenty of them. By God, I’m not no murderer. As I stated, my life is in each and every one of your hands. I ask you please, please make the right decision. I’m asking you please. Thank you very much for listening to me.

ACT V

VO BOUSQUET:

The jury deliberated for three days. On Friday, September 17, the jury returns to the courtroom.

Court clerk - Members of the jury, have you agreed upon your verdict

Jury foreman - yes we have

Court clerk - on the sole count of the indictment, 2nd degree murder, what is your verdict?

Jury foreman - our verdict is guilty

[crying]

Court clerk - You have found the accused, Glen Eugene Assoun, guilty as charged, and it has so been recorded. Are you all in agreement?

Voices - yes.

VO BOUSQUET:

The guilty verdict pronounced, Glen sits quietly for the next 15 minutes as the judge and the Crown discuss all the details of sentencing — the scheduling, the pre-sentencing report, and so forth. Then Justice Hood asks Glen for input:

Suzanne Hood - They’re ready to go to deal with sentencing as early as next week. Another matter you may wish to consider, Mr. Assoun, is whether you wish to try to retain counsel to deal with sentencing.

What is your wish, to do it soon, or to do it after you’ve had either or both an opportunity to retain counsel and have a pre-sentencing report.

Glen Assoun - Well I do wish to say that it’s official that I am wrongfully imprisoned right now. The jury made a mistake.

[fade]

DM: We've been listening to Uncover: Dead Wrong from the investigative team at CBC Podcasts. Tune in tomorrow for the next chapter in this story. That's our program for today. Stay tuned to Radio One for !. But before we go, you may have seen a pretty awesome video making the rounds online. Brothers and YouTubers Tim and Fred Williams have a channel where they filmed themselves listening to classic songs for the first time. Recently, they tried Phil Collins's "In the Air Tonight" and their reactions are pure Internet gold.

SOUNDCLIP

[Clip from Youtube video by Tim and Fred Williams]

DM: Dropped a beat three minutes into the song. That's great. How can you not smile when you hear that joy? It turns out lots of other people loved it too. Enough that sales for the song went up by 1100 percent. It actually hit number two on the iTunes chart just behind Cardi B and Megan Thee Stallion's hit, "WAP." So, here you go. Get out your air drumsticks. Okay? Here's "In the Air Tonight." I'm Duncan McCue. Thanks for listening to The Current.

[Song: "In the Air Tonight" by Phil Collins]

The Current Transcript for August 19, 2020

STORIES FROM THIS EPISODE

Prologue

Parents and teachers express concern for the country’s biggest school board

CBC Podcast - Uncover: Dead Wrong – Episode 3

Aug. 19, 2020 episode transcript

Social Sharing

More from this episode