Pubdate: Sat, 09 May 2015
Source: Toronto Star (CN ON)
Copyright: 2015 The Toronto Star
Contact:  http://www.thestar.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/456
Author: Rosie DiManno
Page: A1

HOW DID LISI CASE EVER GET TO COURT?

Pair Acquitted in Minor Drug Case, Which Would Have Gone Unnoticed 
Without the Rob Ford Connection

"I'm shy."

Those were the first two words offered by Sandro Lisi after he and 
co-accused Jamshid Bahrami were found not guilty by a judge Friday on 
a slew of itsy-bitsy drug charges, including trafficking in 
marijuana. To be precise, 288 grams of marijuana.

Lisi - known to one and all as occasional driver for and great friend 
to former mayor Rob Ford (- was explaining to a reporter why he would 
not be making any statement outside the Old City Hall courthouse, 
where a phalanx of media cameras awaited.

See, "shy" is not a descriptor I would ever have associated with 
Lisi, though he's certainly been close-mouthed since the whole Ford 
scandal broke wide open in 2013. He hasn't, far as we know, rolled on 
Rob, who hasn't been charged with anything in relation to drugs and 
crack houses and gang members.

In any event, Lisi changed his mind and did speak, briefly, flanked 
by happy lawyers.

"Relieved," he said, about the ruling from Justice Ramez Khawly.

As one of the most everywhere present of Ford's acolytes in those 
tumultuous days, Lisi was caught up in the melodrama, either as 
collateral damage or intensely involved player.

Last month, following a preliminary hearing, Lisi was committed to 
trial for allegedly extorting a convicted gang member in his attempts 
to retrieve that notorious video of Ford smoking crack.

I see no reason to describe it as an alleged video. We know, because 
cops have told us, that a video exists and that it's now in police 
possession. And of course Ford ultimately, stunningly, came clean on 
the matter: He did smoke crack and had for months, as investigative 
reportage reached fever pitch, lied about it out of "embarrassment".

Evidence heard at the prelim is under a routine publication ban and 
can't be reported yet.

That's not what this trial was about. Except - let's be frank - it was.

Had he been just some schmo suspected of drug trafficking, in cahoots 
with the operator of a dry cleaning establishment - Bahrami, who has 
a medical marijuana license to grow and use grass - there would 
surely have been no Project Brazen 2 spinoff, no sophisticated 
surveillance undertaken, no GPS tracking, no eyeballing police 
aircraft overhead and no undercover officer posing as a petty dealer 
looking for a drug supplier befriending Bahrami as a prelude - "vast 
conspiracy", in the words of Lisi's lawyer, Domenic Basile - to what 
can fairly be characterized as a sting operation.

Lisi was arrested, in this case, when he stepped outside the 
cleaner's with $900 in marked police money from a drug deal which had 
purportedly transpired 90 minutes earlier. Bahrami's lawyer, Jacob 
Stilman, argued during trial that Bahrami was actually acting on 
behalf of that undercover cop, Det. Ross Fernandes, not Lisi. The 
D-crew maintained that Fernandes was under intense pressure from his 
superiors to involve Lisi in a drug deal and had essentially turned 
Bahrami - legal drug user - into an "unwitting agent."

A complicated and multi-faceted operation which, despite all the 
investigatory tools summoned, ended up in an evidentiary fizzle, 
pfftz, when the case got to court.

Much Ado About Nothing, as Khawly put it in his decision, noting that 
"Project's aspiration for the capture of big game never got off the ground."

In the end (including a separate deal with another deadbeat 
trafficker), a 680-gram sale of marijuana and $3,100 in proceeds - 
what all that effort came down to. And insufficient - or unconvincing 
- - evidence from the Crown of a drug enterprise afoot, as Khawly 
kicked out all eight charges against the defendants.

"Stripped of the elephant looming large in the courtroom, this case 
is as mundane as they come."

But because Khawly is an entertaining judge, he took some two hours 
reading his decision getting to the acquittal, sounding at times more 
like he was on the Catskills circuit.

Normally, Khawly pointed out, "half a pound of marijuana at Old City 
Hall is not something of any interest beyond the courtroom."

This was Lisi in the dock, however (and the poor, shuffling, 
clearly-in-physical-pain Bahrami, who sobbed outside the courtroom afterward).

"Those of us in the administration of justice at Old City Hall live 
in a fairly insular entertainment," said Khawly. "Although arguably 
the busiest court in Canada, we are a fairly tight and small 
fraternity. We toil away from the public eye, on a daily basis, 
trying to dispense justice on a panoply of offences ranging from 
shoplifting to murder.

"Occasionally and sometimes for the most surprising and unexpected 
reasons, a fairly routine case gets elevated to a supernova striking 
a chord where the media glare becomes intense."

And oh, he was clearly basking in it.

"This is when one sees a sea change in the behaviour of all the 
players in the courtroom. The judge struggles to present some 
semblance of a regal and wise figure. The lawyers preen and impart 
clever asides. The court staff rediscovers a more dignified bearing. 
And who knows what effect it has on a witness's evidence."

Cut to the chase: How did this gossamer-slight case get here?

Khawly was palpably unimpressed with the Crown's key witness, Det. 
Fernandes. In the cop's interactions with Bahrami, "he pushes, he 
cajoles, he demands, he dangles baubles . . . Bahrami in that 
recording comes across as a trapped animal who simply has no exit."

Under cross-examination, the officer "bob and weaved" and "never 
categorically agreed that Lisi was the main driver of this investigation."

Of course he was.

Khawly ticked off the pressures that may have been brought to bear on 
Fernandes: High-profile case, "powerful police brass counting on 
him," career advancement, bucking for a promotion ("nothing sinister 
about that in and of itself"), perhaps misinterpreting or 
embellishing evidence "with white lies."

"Or is it more troubling? Did he purposely set out to deceive this Court?"

The judge answered his own question: "I kept looking for areas where 
eventually the (undercover officer) would shore up his credibility. 
It proved to be a fruitless exercise. The long and short of it is 
that on all material points, I simply cannot rely on his evidence. I 
will leave it at that."

But take the undercover cop out of the equation and precious little 
was left. Certainly not enough for conviction on any of the charges.

Again: How did we get here?

Police brass - and the Crown office - need to answer that question. 
But they won't.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom