VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE INTERNATIONAL INC
MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
CONTENTS
Monday 17 May 1993
Victims of crime
Victims of Violence International Inc
Jennifer Raymond, representative
Ministry of the Attorney General
David Winninger, parliamentary assistant to Attorney General
Susan Lee, provincial coordinator, victim/witness assistance programs
STANDING COMMITTEE ON ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE
*Chair / Président: Marchese, Rosario (Fort York ND)
*Vice-Chair / Vice-Président: Harrington, Margaret H. (Niagara Falls ND)
*Akande, Zanana L. (St Andrew-St Patrick ND)
Chiarelli, Robert (Ottawa West/-Ouest L)
Curling, Alvin (Scarborough North/-Nord L)
*Duignan, Noel (Halton North/-Nord ND)
Harnick, Charles (Willowdale PC)
*Malkowski, Gary (York East/-Est ND)
*Mills, Gordon (Durham East/-Est ND)
*Murphy, Tim (St George-St David L)
*Tilson, David (Dufferin-Peel PC)
*Winninger, David (London South/-Sud ND)
*In attendance / présents
Substitutions present/ Membres remplaçants présents:
Brown, Michael A. (Algoma-Manitoulin L) for Mr Curling
Jackson, Cameron (Burlington South/-Sud PC) for Mr Harnick
Clerk / Greffière: Freedman, Lisa
Staff / Personnel: McNaught, Andrew, research officer, Legislative Research Service
The committee met at 1541 in committee room 2.
VICTIMS OF CRIME
Consideration of the designated matter pursuant to standing order 125, relating to victims of crime.
The Chair (Mr Rosario Marchese): I call the meeting to order. I'd like to welcome everybody. We have made some attempts to get some Liberal members here, and I suspect they'll be here shortly, but we tried. We don't want to hold up the proceedings, so we're going to begin.
We had a subcommittee report to present, but we'll hold on that until some of the Liberal members come, in order to get their agreement on what we have done. Once they're here, we'll do that later.
So we'll begin right away on this whole matter regarding standing order 125 designation on victims of crime. To put this on the record, I will read, "The current status of and improvement upon the relationship between victims of crime in the province of Ontario and the justice system in that province, with particular consideration of the issue of a victims' bill of rights, including the operations of the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board."
VICTIMS OF VIOLENCE INTERNATIONAL INC
The Chair: Okay, I'd like to call the first witness that we have here, presenter Jennifer Raymond. Welcome, Jennifer. Jennifer, you might have been told that you have half an hour in this presentation.
Ms Jennifer Raymond: Yes.
The Chair: If you would like members to ask you questions, hopefully you will keep it to 15 minutes in order to allow for that. If you want to go longer, you can. Okay? Jennifer, whenever you feel you want to begin, please do so.
Ms Raymond: I've never spoken before a committee. I've never really spoken before more people than, say, a living room full of people, and then usually only people I know, so you're going to have to unfortunately bear with me.
I'm representing Victims of Violence. Victims of Violence International Inc is based in Ottawa. It's run by Sharon and Gary Rosenfeldt. They're originally from the west coast area. Their son was one of the 11 that was murdered by Clifford Olson. Sharon's experiences are dated in 1981, which was when her son Daryn was murdered. She asked me to represent today because I was assaulted in 1992, so my experiences would be a little more recent than what happened in 1981. A little pamphlet is the first page. I'm sure everyone can read what Victims of Violence represents and what we stand for.
I first found out that there was going to be any sort of bill presented through an MPP in our area, Don Abel's office. They sort of mentioned that something would be coming up and that perhaps it would be fortunate if there would be some public hearings. So I'm very, very happy that there are some public hearings. I think briefs are very important, but somehow you can't ask a brief a question should it pop into your mind. Therefore, it's occasionally good to have people here, and again, as I said, what happened to me happened in 1992, with the investigation still continuing now. It happened in the Hamilton-Wentworth area, so I'm going to restrict myself to what happens in that area. I don't know what happens here in Toronto or Peel or otherwise.
There have been no arrests in my case at this time, so I don't know what happens when you have to go in front of a courtroom. Again, I won't speak about that area. But most of what happens to victims happens immediately after a crime and has to be addressed very shortly thereafter. So I think you'll still find this good.
It's one of the hardest things for me to sit and tell people that the police were the easiest and kindest people that we had to deal with after the assault. They were hardly all-believing; they were quite serious, quite concerned. They had an investigation to do, but they did it with what we found was a lot of respect, honesty to any question we asked. Whenever a feeling would be hurt, which happens after a violent crime, they were always very quick to apologize, and they were extremely sensitive to how hard it is. I'm married and I do have children, and they were quite sensitive not only for my feelings but they extended their sensitivity to my husband and also my children. Many times they've been very reassuring and extremely caring with what they've said. They provided us, for example, with the staff sergeant's home number and a 24-hour number for me to call should something be happening in my case. We had a rather extensive case; we had bounty hunters in our barn and clairvoyants on our doorstep. It was quite the scene for a while there.
Everything else kind of goes downhill from about there, unfortunately. We have one victims services group -- it's on page 1 of, not my written notes, but in the printed notes in the top portion; I have places underlined there -- called Victims Services. What they do is, after some sort of violence or sudden death, they will come to a person's home.
Hamilton-Wentworth of course is a rather large area. We were one of the last people to even obtain a victims services. It says here, and I'll read, "The board...approved Police Chief Robert Middaugh's plan to finance for at least the next 12 months an organization the chief has said `We can't afford to cut.'" I'm sure he's in a very good position to realize what is needed.
Further, "When it started last May, Victims Services was funded by the Ontario government, the region and the board. Earlier this year, however, the province withdrew its aid." It didn't do that for the reason that it's not being used, as victims services is being used. It was done for, I guess, financial squeeze reasons; no other reasons could be made available.
I found this very, very distressing as the Elizabeth Fry Society, which works mainly with offenders, has full funding. And I think that's fine; offender programs must be addressed, but I don't see why victims programs can't be.
The other institution, if you want to call it that, is the sexual assault centre of Hamilton-Wentworth area. My experiences with them were quite interesting at best, and I have a newspaper article; I couldn't make copies of it all because it is an extremely large one. It's written from both sides of the perspective. There was an extreme controversy in our area. They do profess to be militant radical feminists, which if one wishes to be that, that's fine. I will say that doesn't belong with crime victims, to have to hear everything that the police have ever done wrong, every assault that's ever happened. It really doesn't help a person in a raw state. But I think it's best if you make your own decision by reading this article.
The suggestion that I had and that doesn't exist in our area is on page 2 of my enclosure. It's an interview done with Dr Charles Figley, who's considered to be an expert on the subject of victimization and post-traumatic stress disorder. He's asked a question about secondary injury, which is the perceived lack of support and perceived rejection by the community and society, by friends and others.
The question is, "What are the therapies, the social support system that you personally believe are the most effective in treating this kind of second injury?" And he unequivocally says: "Contact with fellow survivors. Those who share the injuries are major sources of reassurance, strength, encouragement, guidance, and counsel...if survivors can judge their own behaviour, not in contrast to the way they were before, or to those who have never had to survive a crisis...they will see...that there's a beginning, a middle and an end."
Sharon Rosenfeldt, who is the president of Victims of Violence, being a victim herself, she's for ever been on the phone to me, always giving whatever encouragement I needed. The only way I found her though was through the police association of Ottawa on a local television station. There was nobody telling me how to find somebody like that.
When I was assaulted I was employed with a company and I got to experience discrimination in the worst possible manner. They had no tolerance for a police investigation and made that very clear. Investigators were not even to step a foot in the building. They eventually started --
The Chair: Go right ahead.
Ms Raymond: Sorry, I didn't know --
The Chair: This is for questions for later.
Ms Raymond: All right. Though I was accepting a promotion at that time and still given a promotion even after the assault -- I was a liked employee -- it was not something that they wished to deal with. They were afraid of either the media or whatever else. In any case, I was dismissed once in December. When they had that challenged they had to take me back but forced me into disability and then finally in March decided, while still on disability, that they wanted no more part of this and they dismissed me. They even told lawyers from the human rights this, that they were dismissing me for no grounds other than that I was a victim of crime.
Unfortunately, the Human Rights Code has absolutely nothing in it. You can be dismissed for being a victim of crime and they can't help you. So with the help of lawyers, we managed to figure out that since I had post-traumatic stress, we can squeeze it in somehow still. It's sad that being a victim of crime somehow doesn't count, but if you, for example, don't like it that your company is going to force you into pension, you can go to the Human Rights Commission.
1550
One of the more interesting things -- that's what I wrote there -- is I was always told to pull myself up by the bootstraps and smile. I don't know how many people would usually say that to crime victims, but it was an exceptional situation.
I started doing research after that into seeing what was actually ever done to address the needs of crime victims, and what was written in the 1980s is astounding. Many things regarding, for example, domestic assaults and incest survivors have been extensively researched and put into place, but it seems like all other groups of violent crime are kind of put to the wayside. It just isn't there.
One idea that was put forward -- it's in the very last section. It's in a book called The Invisible Victim. It starts on page 6 of the enclosure. Robert Reiff is speaking from the American perspective, but it could possibly be addressed in a Canadian perspective too. He states, "The federal government has given aid to victims of fire, flood, earthquakes, tornadoes and even grasshopper ravages since 1827."
On the last page he says, "Disaster measures are rendered without question of entitlements, deservedness or prejudice." Further, that the response to a natural disaster is heroic. They'll help complete strangers. "Many people mobilize within themselves unusual courage and stamina."
Then the very last paragraph is really where the crux is:
"The public has a general attitude that becoming a victim of a violent crime is part of the...normal pattern of existence. Most people consider individuals who suffer the disastrous effects of violent crime as unfortunate victims of their own lifestyle. They are thought unlucky and are promptly forgotten. In most natural disasters people are usually blameless -- and helpless to stop them...Averting or minimizing the disaster by placing the responsibility on someone or something else is futile...Once blaming begins, people fix their attention on the cause of a disaster and become indifferent...to the effect on its victims."
I think if any one of us were to encounter a victim from Hurricane Andrew, none of us would say: "Well, it's your own fault for living beside the ocean. Why did you do that?" Or for those who were killed in the San Francisco quake, nobody would say: "Well, you chose to live on a fault line. You got what you deserved." But it's appalling how many victims of crime got it. I got, "Well, why did you walk your dog?" The family of Nina de Villiers got, "What was she doing jogging alone?" We had every right to walk our dogs and jog and anything else.
When it comes to the finances, which is something that is a subject that I think any victim of crime will tell you, you need money for legal advice. I have to fight my company; you obviously need lawyers to do that. I have two small children; I need day care. Other families who have had other members of their family murdered also have small children and desperately need day care. You can't look after your children when you're having to go to doctors and go through a police investigation. I also requested counselling. I have to pay that for myself as well. My opinion is, grants or interest-free loans could be provided until compensation can be realized through civil suits or through the victims' compensation board.
Crime is a man-made disaster, and as we saw in the disaster that happened in Mississauga, the train derailment, we accepted that as a man-made disaster and acted accordingly. The crime statistics will show you that it is a disaster as well.
Then I've summarized my four points:
If the province could free up funds and give grants or interest-free loans to violent crime victims, these could be repaid when other compensation arrives. The suggestion was made by those whom I've spoken with that if the fine surcharge tax was promptly collected and stringently imposed on offenders, this would not place undue hardship on taxpayers.
Violent crime victims with post-traumatic stress should be treated not as mentally unstable but as compassionately and with as much understanding as we extend to war veterans. There was, of course, that $10-million study done on the Vietnam vets which launched post-traumatic stress and its effects, showing that it is not the victims' original mental health but the stress and duration of the crime that has affected them.
There is a desperate need for improved funding of victims' programs and the creation of new ones. That is not just on the provincial level but also for communities.
I feel the police deserve commendation for the sensitivity and concern that they are now extending to crime victims and for the initiative they are taking to even fund such things when other funding isn't available. I thank you very much.
The Chair: Thank you, Ms Raymond.
We have about 17 minutes or so left, and I'd like to give Mr Jackson the first opportunity to ask some questions.
Mr Cameron Jackson (Burlington South): Jennifer, welcome, and thank you for your contribution. Don't be worried about public presentations; you did just fine.
I have had occasion to work with the Rosenfeldts over quite a few years and have talked with families who've suffered as you have. Others have endured loss of life. You've hit on quite a few of the points that they have raised, but I wonder if we could explore a couple of issues that you feel comfortable with around your case. Your experience with the police was that they advised you what services might be available to you.
Ms Raymond: Yes.
Mr Jackson: What were those services?
Ms Raymond: First of all, they advised me of victims services, and then afterwards when they saw that I probably needed a little more counselling -- they were instructed at the time of their mandate to send any female in crisis to the sexual assault centre. I didn't know anything about it really. I didn't even call them myself. The police called on my behalf because I was in fairly bad shape.
Mr Jackson: They had your permission, though?
Ms Raymond: Oh, yes.
Mr Jackson: So you had access to that service. Victims services was the arm of the police department?
Ms Raymond: I sort of say they're like the ambulance. They come to the scene. They can't operate, but they will come immediately. You need more counselling.
Mr Jackson: It's a combination of officers and --
Ms Raymond: No, no. There are no officers there at all.
Mr Jackson: -- lay people in the program?
Ms Raymond: No, not at all.
Mr Jackson: They're all lay people?
Ms Raymond: One, I believe, worked in social services -- he would have been from the Toronto area -- and then the rest are mainly volunteers.
Mr Jackson: Okay. There are aspects of your victimization which you may or may not also face. We could get -- well, I wanted to deal with the employment aspect, if I could. Since it's a matter of public record, who was your employer?
Ms Raymond: I don't know if I'm permitted to say that.
Mr Jackson: Well, it's a matter of public record.
Ms Raymond: Sure. It's John Bear Pontiac Buick Cadillac.
Mr Jackson: Okay. That matter is currently before the courts?
Ms Raymond: It's currently before the Human Rights Commission.
Mr Jackson: You're paying for that lawyer, or the Human Rights Commission has taken up your case and will advance it on your behalf?
Ms Raymond: The Human Rights Commission has never had to deal with a situation like this. They don't know, since it's in the middle of a police investigation, what they have to present and what they have to conceal. The police obviously don't want an investigation to be damaged because of something having to go to human rights. So I have a lawyer retained to help me for wrongful dismissal and then to assist in the Human Rights Commission's hearing to deal with what to do with crime victims.
Mr Jackson: That is a lawyer you've engaged at your own expense?
Ms Raymond: Yes.
Mr Jackson: Okay. Legal aid is not available to you?
Ms Raymond: No.
Mr Jackson: The third aspect of it: Should there be an arrest, you will then become part of the system of justice, so-called, in this province. What, if anything, have you been advised of the services that will be available to you should that occur?
Ms Raymond: I would have no idea. The best I ever had was a little pamphlet --
Mr Jackson: Yes, and no one's explained --
Ms Raymond: No.
Mr Jackson: -- what services might be available in the Hamilton-Wentworth --
Ms Raymond: I have researched what is available in Hamilton-Wentworth and there isn't very much, as I said. There's victims services and the sex assault centre and that's about it.
Mr Jackson: Mr Chairman, cut me off when --
The Chair: Go ahead.
Mr Jackson: Are you advised -- do you have periodic contact with the police?
Ms Raymond: Oh, yes.
Mr Jackson: How frequently? The details of which you should not share with us, but are they -- one of the issues that I raise in the victims' bill of rights is this relationship which exists between the victim -- who is fundamental to catching the criminal but more fundamentally to the conviction of the criminal because you'll be required in court absolutely, and for that reason there should be an ongoing relationship of explaining to you matters of the investigation and --
Ms Raymond: They've answered any questions that I've ever had, usually in excess of what I actually wanted to know. They return calls promptly, always. The only thing is, at this particular stage of the game I don't really want to know some things.
1600
Mr Jackson: That's fair and that's understandable, given what you've gone through.
I will yield, Mr Chair, and thank you for the time. I appreciated your first point about the surcharge and the tax and the degree to which it is being utilized in this province and the degree to which it goes into general revenues, which goes into the same fund we pay for roads, or it is specifically funneled towards victim services, which is what is occurring in some provinces in Canada but not in Ontario, directly. Thank you very much.
Mr Gary Malkowski (York East): Thank you very much for your presentation. I found it very important information but I thought it was also important for you to talk about your experience with us.
There were a couple of points you raised that I think are very valid and thank you for sharing them with us. But there's one thing you talked about, you mentioned a victims' program, saying it's not available in the Hamilton area, or not funded. There is a program called victim/witness assistance program that is offered within the Hamilton area and it provides support services and it gives you information about the justice system. Are you familiar with that program or that service specifically?
Ms Raymond: Are we talking about victims services? I would just know them under that name of victims services.
Mr Malkowski: Yes, I'm talking about victims services. What services have you received from there, if you could make some comment about that?
Ms Raymond: Jim Dodds is an incredible man. He is one of the most gentle, kind individuals I have ever seen. He would do anything to help a victim of crime. He is restricted, though, in what he can do. He is not a counsellor or a therapist. All he can do is say, "That's awful," and he can say it in one of the nicest manners possible. He can refer a few pamphlets. He can't recommend any therapy or treatment. He can't recommend where to go. He can just be there when it does go to court or come to the scene of the crime, and that's as far as he's limited to.
Mr Jackson: He works for the police.
Ms Raymond: Now, seeing as that they're paying, yes.
The Chair: Any further questions?
Mr Malkowski: No, thank you.
Mr David Winninger (London South): Just following up on Mr Malkowski's comment, I too would like to thank you, incidentally, for sharing your experience with the committee today.
Mr Malkowski was referring to one of 13 different victim/witness assistance programs across the province, and one of them is located in Hamilton. What that program does is, as Mr Malkowski said, it provides emotional support to victims, helps them with courtroom orientation and liaises with the police and the crown, just to name a few of its functions.
It's fortunate too that victims services of Hamilton-Wentworth has been extended, but I think Mr Malkowski's point was that the Ministry of the Attorney General is providing funding already to another program in Hamilton, along with 12 other cities across Ontario, to assist victims and witnesses who are undergoing the court process. As well --
Ms Raymond: Why are these people not mentioned immediately to victims of crime? I wouldn't understand that then, if you're saying there's already another program in the Hamilton area.
Mr Winninger: There's a program associated with the courts that provides support for victims and witnesses who are involved in the court process.
Mr Jackson: Once there's a charge.
Ms Raymond: Okay. Well, there's no charge.
Mr Winninger: Similarly, in London and Ottawa there are also two projects that assist child witnesses to give evidence before the courts and have proven quite successful in increasing the rate of convictions and guilty pleas.
So the suggestion, I think, coming from Mr Jackson was that the offender surcharge is not being used for proactive assistance to victims of crime, I'm giving you some --
Mr Jackson: On a point of order, Mr Chair: I did not say that. I chose my words very -- no, be careful with this. I did not say that. I said that it was not allocated directly to those programs; it went into general revenues. Those are statements of fact. I tried very carefully not to mislead anybody.
Mr Winninger: These revenues --
Interjection.
Mr Jackson: No, no, but he has to be fair as well. I'm not trying to mislead the witness. I said very clearly that it goes into general revenue, period, end of sentence.
Mr Winninger: That's fine. I'm glad to hear you say that. Nor did I say you were misleading the witness, Mr Jackson.
Ms Raymond: I'm not misled. I already know how much Ontario collects as opposed to other provinces and it's pathetic, so it's very sad, but I don't go into detail.
Mr Winninger: Well, we can deal with the figures as we go along in comparison to other provinces, but I just wanted to reassure you in the meantime that the victim surcharge, even though it flows through consolidated revenue, does go towards very advantageous programs in support of victims and witnesses, and I think that needs to come out.
Ms Raymond: Not to be rude to you, sir, but I can guarantee you, if you were a victim of violent crime in the Hamilton-Wentworth area you would be left high and dry in spite of that. You would have people that are so stunned with what's happened to you they don't even know what to say to you. Most people either try to minimize the crime or pretend it just didn't exist and will go away. That's why, though you say there is this one program, it's not enough; there are too many crime victims.
Mr Winninger: Okay. I'm interested in who these people are. You mention your employer, and obviously that conduct, subject to whatever the human rights tribunal finds, seems somewhat reprehensible based on what you said. You did say that the police were cooperative and sensitive and respectful of your situation. Were there other people that weren't so cooperative?
Ms Raymond: When I had to call for social services trying to get some day care, which I very much wanted, she wanted all sorts of letters, which cost me $70 per letter to get from my doctor and otherwise, to assess how bad my situation was and how urgent it would be for me to be able to get public day care. She said it was going to take at least two weeks before they can look at it, then they would discuss it, and in another four-and-a-half weeks they would get back to us. I didn't need help in four-and-a-half weeks with my children.
Mr Winninger: Did you eventually get your day care assistance?
Ms Raymond: No. It's still, I think, being debated somewhere, but it didn't go much further. It's very disheartening then to be told to wait four-and-a-half weeks when you're having a sort of nervous breakdown right now and when you have a police investigation right now.
Mr Winninger: I think I understand. Thank you, Mr Chair.
Mr Tim Murphy (St George-St David): I just want to thank you very much for coming and providing us with your report. It was very well done.
I have a couple of questions. One is, you said the police treated you very well. Have you heard or talked to other people who were victims of violent crime and they had the same experience with the police force?
Ms Raymond: Not really.
Mr Murphy: No?
Ms Raymond: I was with the Hamilton Police Force after the Yeo inquest and I think the Yeo inquest made a tremendous impact on the Hamilton-Wentworth --
Mr Jackson: A little wake-up call.
Ms Raymond: You can say that. I think it changed a lot of their -- I don't know 100% certain; that would be for the chief of police.
Mr Murphy: Do they have officers they designate for certain kinds of crimes to deal with victims, or --
Ms Raymond: I had officers that I don't believe they normally send out for a sex assault. Given the nature and possible link to the Kristen French case, they couldn't just have -- they had to take people that they knew would be able to handle the media attention and would be able to advise me appropriately.
Mr Murphy: And do you know what training programs the police force has to deal with victims now or in --
Ms Raymond: I wouldn't be able to speak about that. I just know from the experience that I got, although I did get the impression that all the officers I dealt with, Sergeant Hrab, his character is a matter of record for the last 20 years and there's never been a complaint. Staff Sergeant Mueller, he's sort of like talking with a reverend of your church. He's hardly a person who -- the other sergeants were all of the same calibre that I dealt with.
Mr Murphy: Do you have any idea of the total of how much you've lost, how much money you've had to put out? You talked about $70 per letter for this day care request, and obviously you lost your job. That's a separate and very reprehensible result, but do you know how much it has cost?
Ms Raymond: It started off, I guess, subtle. The company decided to dock pay if I had to go down to the police station, and then if I said I had to go to a counselling appointment, it started docking there, and then there were, of course, missed days. I couldn't tell you in dollars and cents how much it's been, because I didn't keep track. I'm sorry.
1610
Mr Murphy: Okay. Obviously, no one's been charged yet, correct? Have you dealt with the crown attorney's office at all?
Ms Raymond: No, I have not.
Mr Murphy: Are you familiar with what the crown attorney's office -- part of this relates to the earlier question about victim/witness, because that program comes into effect when someone's charged, and you're going to have to start dealing with court procedures.
I'm a lawyer and I've done both defence and prosecution work, so I've seen both perspectives of how victims can be treated in the court system, and I know that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. It depends obviously on the seriousness of the offence, but certainly in the provincial court system I've seen, it's very meatball justice sometimes. People can be dealt with in a way that I would think has to be shocking.
Ms Raymond: Well, I've only had to deal with wrongful dismissal but, as an example, when the company finally decided it was going to throw in its last straw, it decided to announce that my assault was a complete fabrication and there was no police investigation and wanted the officers to prove otherwise.
The staff sergeant just laughed, had a few comments that I won't say here, but he just said it's substantiated with evidence and witnesses, and he didn't see where the problem is. So I've had to indirectly start dealing with what lawyers will try to say and do to you to intimidate you into not wanting to cooperate or go further.
Mr Murphy: What are the kinds of counselling services you'd like to see available? Let's say you're taken into the police headquarters; obviously the questioning the police do --
Ms Raymond: They don't do that in the police station; they come to your home. They're not going to drag you into a police station in that state.
Mr Murphy: But subsequent to the initial investigation, what would you like to see? What do you think would have been most helpful right after the police had finished their first initial discussions with you in terms of providing you with help and counselling and services?
Ms Raymond: I got most of the counselling from the police. They had one officer there who had been -- Staff Sergeant Mueller had been in a severe car accident, and they sent another officer who had also been in a severe car accident. He spent, I guess, a total of 14 hours with me. He did a lot. It did a lot to know that I wasn't the only one who would ask myself why I am even still alive.
Mr Murphy: You pointed to one of the articles here; one of the important things was contact with fellow survivors. Was there a mechanism to allow you to do that at all?
Ms Raymond: Not at all. The only way I found Sharon Rosenfeldt again was through the police association. There's an inquiry for the sex assault centre. I was told that I didn't fit within their mandate and should have never gone there and that the police should have known better.
I called then the police association to try to verify that. The police association said there was nothing else there. I guess they didn't know about the program Mr Malkowski had mentioned. They referred me then over to Sharon Rosenfeldt and Victims of Violence, and from Sharon's initiative she has found other victims of violent crime herself and then another lady who writes to me regularly to get an interchange of feeling.
Mr Murphy: I know you had some difficulty with the sexual assault centre. Did other people who had dealings with this centre come and talk to you, and were there similar experiences shared by people?
Ms Raymond: I never spoke with those who came forward. I only spoke with one other person, and she had tried to apply for a job at the sex assault centre, but because she'd worked in the police station they told her she wouldn't be eligible for employment there. So that would be the only other person I'd spoken to.
Mr Murphy: Thank you very much. I think my time has been used up.
The Chair: Thank you, Mr Murphy. Ms Raymond, thank you very much for coming and sharing your experiences with us.
Ms Raymond: Thank you, sir.
MINISTRY OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
The Chair: Susan Lee. Hello, Susan. The same thing for you: If you'd like people to be asking you some questions, which I always find useful, you might allow for the 15 minutes at the end.
Ms Susan Lee: Okay, I will do that. Thank you for asking me to come. I've prepared a presentation; it should take about 15 minutes, and then I'd be pleased to answer some questions.
I'm the provincial coordinator for victim/witness assistance programs in the province, which means I work for the Ministry of the Attorney General in the criminal division and I run the programs that David Winninger referred to earlier. There is a program in Hamilton, in fact, and probably the reason this woman didn't know about it is because they didn't want to burden her with that information when there wasn't a charge before the courts.
I'd like to speak to you about the work we have done in my office in an effort to improve the treatment of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice process and I'd like to make a few brief remarks. I divide them into three parts: The first part will be a description of the work of the office and the staff around the province. This area is the one I have the most direct involvement in and about which I have the most information. I want to speak to you, secondly, about the benefits of the program and the actual needs it meets for victims of crime. The third piece will include some brief remarks about how the program might be improved to provide better and more appropriate assistance to victims.
The work in my office in Toronto and around the province deals with both the delivery of the program for victim/witness assistance in the courts and some policy work to make sure that victims' needs are brought up and kept on the front lines when people are developing new policies in the government. I will describe to you the programs. This is not an exhaustive list but it gives you a fairly good idea of what goes on in the criminal division.
The program for victim/witness assistance in the courts began in 1987 in 10 locations. Since then, we have expanded to two more locations. There are 35 staff people who work around the province. There are four special prosecutions where we provide service; in that group of four special prosecutions we employ five staff.
Because we don't have very many staff people, we've designated our work to serve vulnerable victims' groups. The priority groups are women and children.
The local coordinators work to deliver service in two ways. They provide direct service to victims and witnesses; that is, provision of information about the court process, about the cases in which they are involved. They provide support in court; referrals to local services, if required; and from time to time special assistance -- that is, testimonial aids. They provide screens behind which children can testify, amplification microphones, not recording microphones, that kind of thing.
The second big part of their work includes public education and community development. They are expected to participate or develop local groups which improve services to victims in the area in which they work. They also recruit, train and supervise volunteers.
The four special prosecutions in which we're involved include the St John's and the St Joseph's training schools prosecutions, the Grandview Training School For Girls prosecutions and the Prescott prosecutions for child abuse. We provide intensive assistance to these groups of victims to assist them in functioning both during and after the prosecution.
We also provide some child witness projects, to which Mr Winninger referred, in both London and Toronto, and we have started this year on a pilot basis a special child abuse court in Toronto, which is a small court with four special prosecutors assigned to it.
A second big part of our work involves crown training programs in the area of wife assault, sexual assault and child abuse. In Ontario we run a designation system with rotating assignments. Once every year or 18 months, new designations are assigned to existing assistant crown attorneys. The designation obliges the individual to educate their local colleagues as to the special issues involved in the particular kinds of prosecutions. They're to act as a local adviser to their colleagues.
The victim/witness program office operates training programs to assist crown attorneys in understanding the victims' perspectives and also to provide them with recent case law decisions and social science research to make the job of the local expert easier.
The second big area involves policy. We work in diverse areas on policy formulation in relation to victims' issues. Some of these have been raised today. This could range from providing advice on crown attorney directives and guidelines or reviewing and advising next steps for the federal government on C-15 legislation, the amendments to the Criminal Code and the Canada Evidence Act to allow kids better access to the courtroom. We also have been involved in the victim impact statement programs, and some discussion on the fine surtax which has been referred to here. We try to develop and implement the necessary changes to delivery of service for victim and witness programs to better serve vulnerable groups.
1620
The next section will deal with the benefits of the program. Because the only formal role available to the victim of crime is that of a witness in the prosecution, the system must provide information and other services to ease the burden on the victims and witnesses when they're required to participate in the not-so-friendly criminal justice process. At a minimum, victims and witnesses require information about the process and the case in which they're involved in order to effectively participate. To that end, the victim/witness assistance program provides information about the operation of the system, the victim's role, responsibilities to the system, the availability of local services, available opportunities for making representations to the court, progress of the prosecution, compensation opportunities, restitution and disposition. These are just to name a few of the services provided.
The philosophy upon which the program was based is that the victims/witnesses are special members of the public who deserve respectful treatment and timely information. Even though we don't exist everywhere in the province, I think where we do exist, we do this very successfully. The benefits of the training programs for crown attorneys, I think, relate to the philosophy underlying the designated prosecutors' programs for those three areas I mentioned before. The idea is to equip the system with specially trained people in each office in the province to assist them in prosecuting these difficult cases and also to provide guidance to their colleagues locally or assigned to these cases.
In my view, by providing frequent training on a rotating basis, eventually we touch every individual in the system and each individual theoretically will have at some point received training in one or all of these areas. That increases the number of staff throughout the province who will be better equipped to handle these cases.
These are tough cases. Among others, these require special training. Training sensitizes the staff to the problems faced by these victims. It's our experience that if victims are better served, the system will benefit from their cooperation and a better result will prevail. By bringing the victims' perspective to the people who are charged with the responsibility of representing the public interest, the result will be that the system will more appropriately represent society's and the victims' interests.
We take great pains to include issues relevant to vulnerability, gender and race in the delivery of service and training for all of our staff. We're very aware of the unique needs of women and children in the criminal justice process, and through our work with victim/witness staff and assistant crowns, we attempt to keep them constantly apprised of the need for vigilance in their treatment of victim/witnesses and the assumptions they bring to the process.
As to the areas of improvement, I have a short list. This is probably the subject of your questions. As a direct result of the victims' demands for more respectful treatment, increased compensation, comprehensive information, legal, medical and emotional support services and funding to meet these demands has increased in the last decade. Victims are receiving a greater number of better-quality services, but the available services are inconsistent, inequitably distributed and underfunded.
Vulnerable victim populations are a priority for resources, but their special needs have not been fully addressed. A wider and more consistent distribution of resources is urgently needed, if only to address the problems faced by most vulnerable groups. There's considerable potential to contribute in a larger way, but due to the lack of staff, the heavy case loads, the responsibilities for program development, community work, among other duties, the work cannot be handled adequately within the resource limits under which we now operate. We're obviously severely restricted by the financial realities of the province.
The government is currently working to develop a comprehensive package of victims' services and policy improvements at this time, but apart from the fact that we operate the victim/witness program in 12 of 54 offices, this is not enough. We will require special attention to the services necessary to meet the needs of aboriginal victim/witnesses, male sexual assault victims and victims of historical abuse, to name just a few groups.
In concrete terms, I have a couple of things that we could do immediately. We need to develop information books that allow people to participate more effectively in the system, and I've handed out a copy of a book that we prepared to help kids understand what the system is all about. We need books like that to allow adults to better understand how the system works, as well as adolescents.
In respect to training, improvements could be realized through wider availability and increase in frequency. We could give further opportunity to address attitudes, myths governing certain types of behaviours, cultural issues, socioeconomic realities.
In relation to recruitment of crown attorneys or anybody who works in the justice system, we could alter recruiting practices so that victims' interests and attitudes to victims could form a part of the test for employment in this system.
However, with what we currently have, it's my view that we're doing a good job recognizing the diverse and urgent needs of victims and, to the extent possible, we're successful in the work that we do.
Mr Winninger: You mentioned the difficult fiscal circumstances we find ourselves in, and you've certainly expanded on considerable areas in which we could have improvement. I understand that under the former Conservative government of Ontario there basically wasn't any money spent on victims' services, and that assistance to victims came under the Liberal government but then there was some weakening of that commitment. Would you agree with me that this government's commitment to support for victims' services is at least equal to that of the former government and that there are areas in which we have actually improved that commitment?
Ms Lee: Yes. I would agree with that. Certainly we've made great strides in the last few years in relation to the problems faced by women victims of violent crimes, sexual assault, domestic violence, in terms of the public education that we've done and also the programs we've provided.
Ms Margaret H. Harrington (Niagara Falls): Thank you very much for coming before us. I think all of us, no matter what party we're with, would certainly feel that the changes you've described are very worthwhile. I'd like to say that I believe it's part of a bigger process, and that is the process of changing attitudes. Some of the things that were very hidden in our society 20 or 30 years ago are now being confronted and, hopefully, this is really a step forward in enabling people to be more equal in society.
You talk about the children being credible witnesses. This is not a Band-Aid type of solution that we're looking for to the problem of victimization but, hopefully, because the court is dealing with this in an open way, we are actually sending a signal out there for prevention, that these things are taken seriously, they are dealt with correctly and therefore we can look at the prevention angle as well.
My question goes back to some of the comments that were made by the previous witness. In her case, there were no charges laid. The services you described: Are they available to people when there are no charges laid? The other services she mentioned that I feel should be addressed, that we should be looking at, are the day care and the counselling portion of this. Could you answer those two questions?
Ms Lee: The services that are provided by my office are offered after a charge is laid.
Ms Harrington: So in her case, when there were no charges laid, you cannot be of service to her?
Ms Lee: No. Hamilton has the police-based victims' program that would have provided the assistance to her until such time as charges were laid, and then our people would come in and provide assistance.
Ms Harrington: I see.
Ms Lee: Sorry, I forgot the other question.
Ms Harrington: Would you be able to comment about the necessity of the services such as day care and counselling? Do you provide that?
1630
Ms Lee: No, we don't provide day care services. What we try to do is ensure that the victim/witness knows that these are not provided, and unless there's hardship involved we won't become involved in that. But what we try to do is make sure they have enough time to arrange those services.
Counselling: We provide crisis intervention services in our offices. If people require counselling in the community, we try to find them that appropriate counselling. It's not always easily available, but we do try to help them find it and/or make the arrangements for them.
Mr Murphy: Thank you very much for coming. I appreciate it, and your candour as well. It was a very fine answer to the question by Mr Winninger.
Ms Lee: Thanks.
Mr Murphy: A couple of questions. You talked about one potential being a change in recruitment for crown attorneys and others in the system, and I'm wondering what you meant by that, basically.
Ms Lee: I think a good example of that is what's going on with the provincial judges right now, in that the interview process is a lot more burdensome on them than it was in the past. They are asked questions about their community work and their attitudes and that kind of thing. That's what I was referring to: that victims are included in the questions that are asked of the applicant. That was my view, as well. That was my comment about how I thought the system should change.
Mr Murphy: I appreciate that. The other thing is that we've just had the whole system dealing with the Askov decision. A lot of charges got thrown out, which creates a lot of crisis for some victims, I think, because they had a real problem understanding what was going on, in some cases, although I think that problem still continues for people, regardless of whether the person's convicted or acquitted, depending, obviously, on the grounds. What does the program do once there is a result in court? Does it follow up subsequently, and what is it?
Ms Lee: We sit down with them and provide them with the information they need to understand what the outcome was. What we try to do during the course of our work is make sure that whatever the result, it's not a surprise, if we can do that. We make sure they know what the options are for the judge, so that if the worst happens, they are somehow prepared for this. Then what we try to do after is sit with them and help them understand what that means and provide assistance to getting them on the track back to their own lives in the end.
Mr Murphy: I can't recall how long it's been in the code, but one of the things in the code is a compensation order. I think it's 7.10 or something like that. I'm not sure how new that is, but has there been any monitoring by your department about the use of that provision?
Ms Lee: There hasn't been any monitoring by my staff about the use of that provision, so I can't really answer that question.
Mr Murphy: One of the reform areas you mentioned was compensation in a general sense. What are the kinds of things you'd be looking at? I mean, who would pay? Where would it come from? Would you propose the surcharge going into a designated fund?
Ms Lee: What we tell the people with whom we deal is that there is criminal injuries compensation, for instance, and how to get access to that. We also tell them about the level of compensation that may be available to them. We also make sure they know what's available through the Criminal Code in terms of getting restitution or some form of compensation, and then whatever their thoughts are, we make sure the crown attorney has a note of that so the submissions can be made in relation to that person's wishes.
Mr Murphy: I'm just wondering what your sense or your department's sense of the cost is. How much it would cost to provide a similar program in the -- is it 12 communities where it is now? If you were going to provide that across the system, what would the cost of that program be?
Ms Lee: We've spent about $2 million now. I'd say probably --
Mr Jackson: Per centre?
Ms Lee: No, for the 12 sites.
Mr Murphy: Total $2 million?
Ms Lee: Yes, and I would say $5 million to $7 million, probably $7 million.
Mr Murphy: About $7 million, and that would provide you with the same level of service as you have now in the 12 communities that have the project?
Ms Lee: Yes, in the 54 sites, or at least there would be service in that many sites.
Mr Murphy: Then there would be some additional moneys required to expand the services to, for example, aboriginal, male sexual assault victims, historical. Would that --
Ms Lee: No, we would provide a minimum level of service as we do now. Yes, you're right; sorry. If we were to enhance the range, yes.
Mr Murphy: Thank you, those are my questions.
Mr Jackson: I guess if Mr Winninger is going to go back to what the Tories did -- I don't want this to become partisan and I hope he would resist an opportunity such as that. I would, though, for the record, indicate that the first system of a bill of rights was brought in by an NDP government in Manitoba. I think they deserve full credit for that, and I think their sensitive programs in court reform for aboriginals are the leading edge in this country. My basic drive and desire is that we get some of that enlightenment in our province. That's about as partisan as I want to go with your comment, Mr Winninger, and I would hope we could work on this.
Ms Lee, thank you for a very balanced presentation, a very good one, actually. Your candour in areas of improvement is refreshingly honest and open, but I'm not here to criticize the victim/witness assistance program. I think it's wonderful. I think it's at its infancy in terms of its ability to impact the rights for victims in improving our justice system as the key component. Seventy-five per cent of all crimes result in convictions because the witness comes forward, and the degree to which witnesses are treated with respect and assisted, without directing them, about which we have to be clear -- in our justice system they can't be directed. I'm a big supporter and believer in your program and would just like to see it expanded in the interests of justice.
Having said that, you are also one spoke in the whole wheel of the justice system, and reforms have to occur in front of you and behind you in order that our justice system -- I guess our justice system is very much like long-term care is right now. We've put a bunch of things together over the years and they've worked, but nobody's really brought them together so that they could work more efficiently. Justice and victims' rights are somewhat similar in that regard. I guess you are limited, to a degree, in the amount of impact you can have positively, relative to other jurisdictions in Canada. That's a part of your presentation which you didn't get into, except your issues of inequity, unevenness and underfunding.
But there is the issue, for example, about the degree to which a victim's impact statement impacts in our courts in this jurisdiction, in this province versus other provinces. This is a significant issue. It came up in the Jonathan Yeo inquest, and Priscilla de Villiers is going to come here specifically to talk about that. Had the mandate of Ontario's victim/witness program been such that the impact statement of the woman who was sexually assaulted and raped at gunpoint by Jonathan Yeo found its way, through your offices, to that moment before the justice of the peace when she made the ruling that he was eligible for bail, that he could continue to leave the country, carry a firearm if he so chose and so on -- it's very clear that the victim's impact statement and the impact of being a witness to the case was not taken into consideration at all by the crown attorney. We don't expect the other attorney to; I mean, that's his role.
Now I'm getting into an area you would have difficulty commenting about, because these are areas that are the substantive element of reform in how our justice system operates. What kind of feedback are you getting from your field personnel who are assisting in court settings? It's more than hand-holding and demystifying and making a person feel good about having been a victim. It has much more to do with how do they feel safe because they feel empowered; that they're not just being used by the justice system to satisfy the Queen in our justice system, as opposed to bringing the victim fully into the equation.
What kinds of things have you not mentioned that are essential components of reform in our system for victims who are called upon to be witnesses, who can then help not only in convicting the criminal but participating in their own self-empowerment in the justice process?
1640
Ms Lee: That's a tough one.
Mr Jackson: I know. I'm sorry. But you've been doing so well, Susan.
Ms Lee: Thank you.
Mr Jackson: I don't doubt you know how to deal with this.
Ms Lee: Maybe I could just speak briefly to the victim impact statements. I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at. Victim impact statements, in accordance with what's in the code, are only supposed to be available to the court after a conviction is registered.
Mr Jackson: In the sentencing process.
Ms Lee: Yes.
Mr Jackson: But it has application for bail, early release, parole. It has all sorts of implications.
Ms Lee: If it's there, if it's disclosed, yes.
Mr Jackson: People need assistance with putting in words their feelings about that individual and what's happening to them, who caused them to suffer, who victimized them. The courts can't write it for them, but the courts have to assist them. I have cases of 12-year-old girls who have been sexually assaulted by a grandfather. A male police officer walked in and put a pencil and paper on the table and said, "Tell me what you had." No one told this 12-year-old girl that that was her victim impact statement. Those kinds of incidents are occurring, and obviously if the police and crown attorneys aren't doing it, there's a role for your office and your personnel in that, just as one example. I could give you a hundred examples.
Ms Lee: Absolutely. In fact, we do provide people with assistance in filling out victim impact statements or writing letters, which is essentially the same thing, to talk about how it is that they feel after something like this has happened, what has changed their life. Yes, I think it's important. I think it's important not only for the individual to have an opportunity to do that, but it's important for the individual to know that the officials in the system understand the way they've been hurt.
I agree with you. We use them, we help people put them together in the sense that we explain what they're used for and why they're important. It's a very useful tool to make the system more human.
Mr Jackson: Finally, Mr Chairman, if I can, just on that one point, and I realize time is short, this is the double-edged sword, because you're capable of doing all this and you'll do victim impact statements and assist where the law now says those are required and will be helpful to our justice system. There are many jurisdictions nationally and internationally and in continental North America where there are more requirements of that kind of process that you'd be fulfilling. But when we're told that there aren't the funds necessary, that reform cannot occur, because it means not just providing services all across Ontario but that there would be more work for you to do in terms of assisting these victims.
There are the two issues here, and the other is that inquest after inquest, court reform after court reform mentions this key issue of involving the witnesses so that they can have an impact on the justice system. That means more work for your people, a little more training, but more work because your mandate -- and it's encoded in our laws that these are available to victims. Then you would explain it to them and then your assistance would be required on a much larger scale because more opportunities would exist in our court system relative to other jurisdictions.
I think that's the point I wanted to try and pull out from you, because it's not just simply doing what you do now, as far as you could go, and extending it to the rest of the province; there is more that you could do if the laws and our justice system were reformed for you.
The Chair: Very good, Cam. Any response, Ms Lee?
Ms Lee: I just wanted to say that victim impact statements, having worked with them for many years, are most effective when the victims write them themselves. Just to make that comment.
The Chair: Ms Lee, thank you very much for your presentation. It was very helpful.
Ms Lee: Thanks.
The Chair: We have three items that I'd like to comment on.
First of all, we have the subcommittee report, and I would like to approve it today. I will read it. If there is any objection, we will deal with that perhaps another day because Mr Chiarelli's not here, but I don't think people will object to this. Let me read it.
"Your subcommittee recommends that the subcommittee be authorized to approve expenses to allow witnesses to travel to Toronto to appear before the committee with respect to the standing order 125 designation on victims of crime."
Any discussion on that? All in favour? Any opposed? That carries.
I wanted to encourage the members to peruse some of the research that has been done. There are quite a number of individual papers here and I urge you to review them.
Thirdly, with respect to tomorrow's proceedings, we are likely to have one presenter tomorrow. We are going to see whether or not Mr Tannis can come or whether he could be moved to another day so that we can have a fuller agenda with more presenters as opposed to having a committee for one person. If Mr Tannis can only come tomorrow, we will meet tomorrow to deal with that presentation.
Mr Murphy: I was reading through the fine research by the research officer and I wanted to ask one follow-up question on the question I asked the last witness, and that's the compensation order question. Could I ask the researcher, through you, Mr Chair, to follow up on whether there's any information regarding the use of the compensation order provision of the code relating to assisting victims?
The Chair: Okay. We will do that as soon as we can.
The committee adjourned at 1646.