the inquiry

Lawyer demands client recall; Motion says Adams wasn't treated fairly

Cornwall Standard Freeholder

16 January 2008

Posted By Claude McIntosh

Cornwall Public Inquiry commission counsel has come under fire from an Ottawa lawyer for what he says was a less than forthcoming presentation of evidence involving his client.

Gordon Cameron of Blake, Cassels & Graydon of Ottawa says his client, much respected Cornwall lawyer Sean Adams, was not treated fairly by lead counsel Peter Engelmann and Commissioner Normand Glaude.

Cameron, who bumped with Glaude during a November session, in a motion filed with the commission and dated Dec. 13 demands that his client be recalled.

A source says that the motion has prompted commission counsel to consider recalling Adams.

After this newspaper was unable to obtain the "public" document from the commission, Cameron provided a copy on Friday.

"It's a public document," said Cameron.

Cameron contends Engelmann "ambushed" Adams during his two days on the witness stand in November.

It would be an understatement to say that Adams and his legal team - Cameron and Cornwall lawyer Ron McClelland - were caught off guard when Engelmann blindsided Adams with an undisclosed line of questioning and out-of-the-blue announcement of that a secret witness was being called by the commission.

Protests by Cameron and McClelland were supported by several other senior counsels attending the inquiry that day.

All contended that under the rules of the game, this should have been made known to Adams (and his lawyers) when the commission met with him on Oct. 22, "or soon thereafter as commission counsel became aware of the anticipated evidence."

Cameron minces no words in his motion that puts Engelmann and Glaude in its cross hairs.

"The unfairness of the surprise line of questioning - correctly characterized as an ambush, was manifest, and the line of questioning should have been terminated immediately by the commissioner (Glaude).

"The use of this inappropriate tactic, and the decision of the commissioner to allow commission counsel to proceed, even in the face of vigorous objections and requests for adjournment by senior counsel, can be said to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the commission."

Cameron says that to minimize the "irreparable harm" to Adams the commission must recall him so that he has the opportunity to testify in response to the questions posed to him by commission counsel on Nov. 15 and in response to evidence given by the surprise witness, a former secretary with the Duncan MacDonald law firm.

The secretary, the inquiry was told, would testify that the venerable MacDonald, now deceased, heaved Adams along with lawyers Malcolm MacDonald (no relation) and Jacques Leduc along with a young man out of his office when they came calling.

Two other secretaries who worked in the office at the time were not called by the commission.

Adams testified he had a good relationship with Duncan MacDonald. He said he never attended the office with the two mentioned lawyers, and was never given the proverbial bum's rush by Duncan MacDonald.

Cameron's motion contends that the use of Engelmann's inappropriate tactic, and Glaude's decision to allow commission counsel to proceed, "even in the face of vigorous objections and requests for adjournment by senior counsel, can also be said to give rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias on the part of the commission."

The motion reminds Glaude that "personal and professional reputations are at stake on matters of profound importance in a closely-knit community."

In this case, the pristine reputation of Sean Adams.