(This column was published in the North Shore News on Jan. 14, 1998)
System failing young victims
By Leo Knight
SINCE I first wrote about the mind-boggling sweetheart deal former Burnaby school principal William Bennest received in his kiddie porn/pedophilia case, I have spoken to a great many people who are as outraged as I am in observing how these people are being seemingly protected by the very system that is supposed to protect their victims.
I have also spoken to many police officers frustrated at watching their best efforts squandered by the justice system once the case leaves their hands.
Nothing, however, prepared me for the experience of speaking to a Port Coquitlam family whose life was torn apart after encountering a pediatrician they went to for help with their five-year-old daughter.
In 1992, they were having some problems with their daughter who was experiencing hyper-activity difficulties that were affecting her ability to learn in school.
After being referred by their family doctor to a specialist, they felt they would get the help their daughter needed to be able to progress with her peers in kindergarten.
After the first year of visits to the specialist, they had taken a holiday to Ontario to visit with the kids' grandparents. The mother had to return a few days early to go back to work. Dad and the kids stayed behind to finish the holiday.
Back in B.C., Mum received a phone call from the child's doctor who said he had to speak with her about the child. Because her job entails out-of-town travel, Mum said she couldn't come in to speak to him. The doctor, making it sound urgent, said he would stop by on his way home from the office that night.
Once he arrived, it became apparent he had ulterior motives. He began making moves on Mum, who fought him off and ran from the house and to safety from the lecherous doctor.
Dad immediately returned with the family from Ontario and the police got involved. Dad, an RCMP officer, even went so far as to see the doctor and get an admission of guilt from him in an interview while he wore a hidden tape recorder. The RCMP conducted an investigation of the complaint and recommended criminal charges of sexual assault against the doctor.
The parents then sat down with their daughter and explained to her they wouldn't be going back to see that doctor and they would find her another doctor to help her. The daughter responded that she was quite happy with this turn of events. Subsequent conversation led the parents to question the little girl further. They were shocked with the answers they got.
The little girl described a series of sexual assaults in graphic detail, albeit with the childlike innocence one would expect. Again the police were brought in. The child went to see a specially trained therapist and was interviewed for the purposes of obtaining a "disclosure" admissible in court.
During this and subsequent interviews, the child was asked to draw, with crayons, scenes depicting the incidents with the doctor. I won't go into the specific descriptions in this column for fear of distressing the reader. Suffice to say the depictions were graphic, decipherable and showed activity that should be far beyond the knowledge of a little girl. In other words, the "disclosure" was excellent from an evidentiary point of view.
The psychologist concluded the girl had definitely been abused. This finding was later confirmed by a second psychologist, a court-recognized expert from UBC.
Initially, charges were approved by local Crown in Coquitlam. Days later, Regional Crown, Austin Cullen, reversed the decision to prosecute. The family went ballistic. The media got involved, as did a lawyer, Paul Jaffe, for the family.
As a result, the attorney general's ministry appointed a special "ad hoc" prosecutor to review the matter. In a strange twist of irony, Peter Leask, who later was to be defence counsel to William Bennest, got the appointment.
The doctor retained Vancouver lawyer David Crossin to represent him. While this was going on, Leask, the AG and the Law Society were the subject of a lawsuit filed by another counsel in an unrelated matter. Crossin was council for the Law Society in that lawsuit.
Despite this apparent conflict, or at least, lack of independence, since both Leask and Crossin were on the same side in one matter and adversaries in another, the attorney general of the day, Colin Gablemann, and his assistant, Ernie Quantz, allowed Leask to continue in the matter of the doctor.
What, there were no other lawyers out of the 7,000 members of the B.C. Bar who were available?
In the interim, the doctor applied for and received an "ex parte" (given with only one side present) order, prohibiting the publication of his name and silencing the victim family. It took over a year to get that order lifted before Dr. John Gossage could be named. Once named, other complainants came out of the woodwork until there were over 40 separate complaints.
But by the end of the investigation by Leask, no charges were laid.
Gossage was convicted by the College in March '94 of "unprofessional conduct" relating to his assault on Mum. His licence was suspended for six months and he was fined over $32,000. That's it. Yet, the college knew of complaints since at least 1986 after being advised in writing by an RCMP officer in Williams Lake. Gossage is now practising in Kamloops.
Leask later orchestrated the sweetheart deal for Bennest. Mum and Dad have separated following the anguish they were put through in this case.
The little girl is now 11. Cute as hell, even with braces on her teeth. But, she's been in therapy ever since.
Seems fair, doesn't it?
-30-