Pubdate: Fri, 18 June 1999 Source: Toronto Star (Canada) Copyright: 1999, The Toronto Star Contact: http://www.thestar.com/ Author: Jim Rankin and John Duncanson, Toronto Star Staff Reporters DRUG TRAFFICKING CASE ENDS ABRUPTLY Crown refuses judge's order to disclose files A federal prosecutor has folded the case against an alleged drug trafficker rather than follow a judge's order and disclose complaint files involving a Toronto police drug squad. In a surprise development yesterday, federal Crown Attorney Sandy Thomas told Mr. Justice Keith Hoilett, of the Superior Court of Justice, that she would not call any evidence in the case against Silvio Scaduto, effectively giving the judge no choice but to acquit the Toronto man. The decision stunned Clayton Ruby, the defence lawyer on the case, who suggested the police force and crown ended the case to sidestep rulings that would have forced them to disclose information about alleged misconduct by the drug squad prior to the arrest of his client on Jan. 7, 1998. ``It may be that they are so afraid of the contents of those files that they would prefer outright acquittals to disseminating that information to the defence,'' said Ruby, who was seeking information contained in nine complaint files involving the officers. Thomas, the crown attorney, could not be reached for comment yesterday. But she told Hoilett earlier this week that she only turned over information connected to one of nine previous complaints against the drug squad officers because the others were irrelevant and, as well, disclosing them might breach privacy laws. Hoilett ruled that the documents be released - something another judge, who heard an application for disclosure, had already ordered. Deputy Chief Mike Boyd, who is in charge of central command and the drug squad officers, would not comment on the court case yesterday. He did say that six members of the same drug squad were recently reassigned, on a temporary basis, to other duties. Boyd said the moves were not related to this case. Ruby's client Scaduto was arrested Jan. 7, 1998, after a police surveillance team allegedly saw a drug deal take place. Court heard that the drug squad made two unsuccessful attempts to get search warrants for Scaduto's home. A third try proved successful, but court was told that, by that time, police had already entered the home. The resulting charges - trafficking in cocaine, dangerous driving, assault with intent to resist arrest, possession of unregistered restricted weapons, careless storage of a firearm and ammunition - could have meant serious time in prison had Scaduto been convicted. Scaduto was acquitted on all the charges he faced in the 1998 arrest, but faces unrelated charges in another drug case. Ruby's argument for disclosure of police complaints files began with a Star article published last year that detailed a police complaint investigation into an October, 1997, case involving five of the seven officers involved in the Scaduto case. That complaint, in which a police investigator found that the officers had conducted ``intrusive'' strip searches of two men and illegal searches of several homes connected to them in October, 1997, was dismissed by the force on a technicality. A police adjudicator ruled the discipline case had taken too long to get to the hearing stage. As a result, none of the evidence surrounding the allegations was heard, including investigator Detective William Nelson's report that found ``the very essence of fundamental justice was denied'' to the two men. The adjudicator's decision was appealed and is currently under review by the province's civilian commission on policing services, the main police watchdog agency. Last month, in the midst of Scaduto's trial, Ruby made an application to another judge for an order requiring the crown to obtain and disclose all prior allegations of misconduct against the officers involved in his client's arrest. On the other side of the courtroom, lawyers from the federal justice department, the Toronto police force and a lawyer representing the seven officers opposed the motion. They argued the complaint records in question contained private information about people not involved in the case and should not be disclosed. Mr. Justice Michael Dambrot agreed with Ruby, and in a sternly worded decision, ordered the Toronto force to disclose all prior complaint investigation records involving the seven officers in Scaduto's case. Dambrot questioned how the crown could say it had met its disclosure requirements because the Toronto police force had refused to release documents that may have been relevant. ``The attorney-general has asked for the records. The police department has refused to turn them over,'' he said in his ruling. Dambrot also chastised the force for contending that its obligation for disclosure was ignored in this case because the complaint files were not related to the police role of investigating and prosecuting. ``This is no mere fishing expedition,'' he wrote. ``It is a matter of public record that allegations of improper warrantless searching exist against some of the crown witnesses in this case.'' Despite the ruling, Crown Attorney Thomas decided not to disclose information relating to eight other public complaints made against the officers in the Scaduto case. Thomas agreed to disclose only files relating to the complaint written about by The Star, since it had already been made public. It was her position that the information in the eight other files was factually irrelevant to the Scaduto case and raised no issues relating to unlawful searches. As well, there were no findings of misconduct. Thumbnail sketches of the eight other complaints, many of which involve more than one officer, show one officer, Detective John Schertzer, was named in seven of them. Ruby was seeking complaint disclosure on Schertzer and Detectives Gregory Forestall, John Reid, Joseph Miched, Steve Correia, Kim Donison and Ray Pollard. With files from Joel Baglole - --- MAP posted-by: Don Beck