A veritable Law Society of Manitoba Rogues Gallery?
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post, "Guilty! Guilty! Guilty!"
Good day to you Mr. Pieuk,
Unfortunately, I’ve been away from the coffee shop, and very busy within the confines of my employment. As such, I’ve not been able to comment or perform research on this seemingly perpetual endorsement of the perverted by the LSM. However, one should not be surprised by the ruling, it is consistent with the decisions of law societies in the past decade. For example:
On Sexual Harassment
Harry Wiens – February 2010. Pleaded guilty to 4 counts of professional misconduct, including sexual harassment of staff. Decision: Reprimand, psychiatric assessment and counselling, $10,000 in costs.
Jeffrey J. Plantje – June 2007. Pleaded guilty to 2 counts of professional misconduct, including sexual harassment of staff. Decision: 30 day suspension, $1,500 fine and required attendance before Practice Review Committee prior to reinstatement. Remains listed as suspended in Alberta. [Alberta Law Society Decision – Practicing member of Law Society of Manitoba]
David H. Davis – May 2001. Pleaded guilty to 1 count of professional misconduct for sexual harassment of a client. Decision: 45 day suspension and $1,000 in costs.
On the counts of Breach of Integrity and Promoting Personal Interests, the LSM does not have any of its Discipline Case Digests that are on point. Most hearings conducted find their foundation in financial matters between lawyers and clients, and not involving prostitution of one’s wife and sexual harassment. Disbarment in Manitoba carries with it a heavy burden of proof, and not just of unprofessional conduct, but either repeated appearances before the Disciplinary Committee or criminal charges.
Based on my review of the digests over the past decade, very few members of the LSM have been disbarred, and of those none for sexual harassment.
Gary Dolovich – October 2010 – Disbarred for possession and distribution of child pornography.
Donald McKinnon – March 2010 – Disbarred (Appeal pending) 6 counts of misconduct including: misappropriation of funds ($68,000.00), misleading the client, fabrication of statements of account and reporting letters, misleading the LSM and other counsel.
Henry Carroll – December 2008 – Disbarred (Appeal pending) 4 counts of misconduct including: made himself executor of an estate, failed to report assets to the court, conflict of interest, falsifying documents, and making payments to his spouse.
Ingrid Chen – March 2007 – Disbarred (Appeal dismissed) 12 counts of misconduct including: criminal conviction for conspiracy and breach of conditional sentence.
Victor Savino – April 2005 – Disbarred. Criminal convictions for drug offences, declared an “ungovernable member.”
Douglas Griffin – May 2005 – Disbarred. Theft of $4,200 from a non-profit organization while acting as a director and officer of the corporation.
James Bomek – March 2004 – Disbarred. 26 counts of professional misconduct including: falsifying a bill of sale, seeking personal loans from clients without proper legal advice, failing to file documents for clients, etc.
Donald MacIver – August 2003 – Disbarred. 1 count of professional misconduct for 3 convictions under the Income Tax Act and Criminal Code.
Considering the light view that the legal profession takes of sexual harassment, it is not surprising that Mr. King was only reprimanded. Based on my review of the digests over the past decade, in my opinion, Ms. Leonoff’s statement that “A reprimand is a very serious penalty” [Winnipeg Sun – Disgraced Lawyer Reprimanded – March 29, 2011], is hardly accurate. Reprimands are by far the most common decision, and seem to have zero impact in terms of deterrence. One only need look at how many hearings are conducted on an annual basis and how often the same names crop up over and over.
It would appear that sexual harassment is not often reported, as is true with general society, because the victim is put on trial and there is little or no consequence for the perpetrators.
I am disappointed with the LSM as they did have an opportunity to make an example out of Mr. King for the profession and to raise its standards of conduct. Instead, they have reminded the membership that inappropriate sexual conduct is something that can occur, and if you’re caught, the consequences are minimal. A nice message to send to the public, and I doubt anyone will report this type of behaviour in the future.
I wonder, has the LSM ever reported sexual harassment conduct to the authorities when members plead guilty? I note that the Alberta Law Society elected to not advise the Attorney General, but there are no notations in LSM decisions regarding behaviour that can be construed as criminal conduct. Which leads to my final question – do not all lawyers, including those at the LSM, have a duty to report criminal behaviour?
Maybe sexually harassed clients and staff need to report directly to the police or RCMP rather than the governing body. Then, perhaps, justice may be served. Though, based on recent decisions from the judiciary, that is a question unto itself. A little more jaded toward the system, I continue to seek .....
Veritas Justitias Honoris
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear VJH:
On behalf of Readers thank you very much for your time and effort researching the Law Society of Manitoba's beyond abysmal discipline of members convicted of sexual harassment.
The LSM holds a monopoly. If a person is of the belief they've been sexually harassed by a lawyer the Winnipeg police will not investigate. Using the non-emergency number we talked directly with an officer. The main reason seemed to be because such alleged incidents do not fall under any provisions of the criminal code. Therefore, you'll be referred to, yes, the Law Society.
Next it was Ombudsman Manitoba. Same response. Finally, we tried the Manitoba Human Rights Commission multiple times but when we followed prompt one, as directed to file a complaint, the number at the other end rang repeatedly without answer. However, it's reasonable to assume we would have likely received the same response.
Where the police refuse to take action, a procedure exists whereby a private citizen can complete a form, send it to the Prosecutions Branch of Manitoba Justice to request a charge be laid. You could conceivably find yourself before a Queen's Bench judge trying to convince them the matter should be considered by the courts. Private prosecutions are extremely rare but a handful have occurred in Canada over the years. Good luck trying to take an LSM member to QB on a sexual harassment charge!
Ms Leonoff was no more than a couple sentences into her oral decision when we turned to the gentleman seated beside us to whisper, "This is going to be a tiny slap on the wrist.' He nodded in agreement. Sure enough. Much has been made by The Law Society of Mr. King's reprimand. Question. Are reprimands like pardons in that in "x" years Anthony King can apply to the LSM to have it expunged from his record?
Your next research project VJH. It is our considered opinion The Law Society of Manitoba's treatment of sexual harassment complaints is a joke!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
Good day to you Mr. Pieuk,
Unfortunately, I’ve been away from the coffee shop, and very busy within the confines of my employment. As such, I’ve not been able to comment or perform research on this seemingly perpetual endorsement of the perverted by the LSM. However, one should not be surprised by the ruling, it is consistent with the decisions of law societies in the past decade. For example:
On Sexual Harassment
Harry Wiens – February 2010. Pleaded guilty to 4 counts of professional misconduct, including sexual harassment of staff. Decision: Reprimand, psychiatric assessment and counselling, $10,000 in costs.
Jeffrey J. Plantje – June 2007. Pleaded guilty to 2 counts of professional misconduct, including sexual harassment of staff. Decision: 30 day suspension, $1,500 fine and required attendance before Practice Review Committee prior to reinstatement. Remains listed as suspended in Alberta. [Alberta Law Society Decision – Practicing member of Law Society of Manitoba]
David H. Davis – May 2001. Pleaded guilty to 1 count of professional misconduct for sexual harassment of a client. Decision: 45 day suspension and $1,000 in costs.
On the counts of Breach of Integrity and Promoting Personal Interests, the LSM does not have any of its Discipline Case Digests that are on point. Most hearings conducted find their foundation in financial matters between lawyers and clients, and not involving prostitution of one’s wife and sexual harassment. Disbarment in Manitoba carries with it a heavy burden of proof, and not just of unprofessional conduct, but either repeated appearances before the Disciplinary Committee or criminal charges.
Based on my review of the digests over the past decade, very few members of the LSM have been disbarred, and of those none for sexual harassment.
Gary Dolovich – October 2010 – Disbarred for possession and distribution of child pornography.
Donald McKinnon – March 2010 – Disbarred (Appeal pending) 6 counts of misconduct including: misappropriation of funds ($68,000.00), misleading the client, fabrication of statements of account and reporting letters, misleading the LSM and other counsel.
Henry Carroll – December 2008 – Disbarred (Appeal pending) 4 counts of misconduct including: made himself executor of an estate, failed to report assets to the court, conflict of interest, falsifying documents, and making payments to his spouse.
Ingrid Chen – March 2007 – Disbarred (Appeal dismissed) 12 counts of misconduct including: criminal conviction for conspiracy and breach of conditional sentence.
Victor Savino – April 2005 – Disbarred. Criminal convictions for drug offences, declared an “ungovernable member.”
Douglas Griffin – May 2005 – Disbarred. Theft of $4,200 from a non-profit organization while acting as a director and officer of the corporation.
James Bomek – March 2004 – Disbarred. 26 counts of professional misconduct including: falsifying a bill of sale, seeking personal loans from clients without proper legal advice, failing to file documents for clients, etc.
Donald MacIver – August 2003 – Disbarred. 1 count of professional misconduct for 3 convictions under the Income Tax Act and Criminal Code.
Considering the light view that the legal profession takes of sexual harassment, it is not surprising that Mr. King was only reprimanded. Based on my review of the digests over the past decade, in my opinion, Ms. Leonoff’s statement that “A reprimand is a very serious penalty” [Winnipeg Sun – Disgraced Lawyer Reprimanded – March 29, 2011], is hardly accurate. Reprimands are by far the most common decision, and seem to have zero impact in terms of deterrence. One only need look at how many hearings are conducted on an annual basis and how often the same names crop up over and over.
It would appear that sexual harassment is not often reported, as is true with general society, because the victim is put on trial and there is little or no consequence for the perpetrators.
I am disappointed with the LSM as they did have an opportunity to make an example out of Mr. King for the profession and to raise its standards of conduct. Instead, they have reminded the membership that inappropriate sexual conduct is something that can occur, and if you’re caught, the consequences are minimal. A nice message to send to the public, and I doubt anyone will report this type of behaviour in the future.
I wonder, has the LSM ever reported sexual harassment conduct to the authorities when members plead guilty? I note that the Alberta Law Society elected to not advise the Attorney General, but there are no notations in LSM decisions regarding behaviour that can be construed as criminal conduct. Which leads to my final question – do not all lawyers, including those at the LSM, have a duty to report criminal behaviour?
Maybe sexually harassed clients and staff need to report directly to the police or RCMP rather than the governing body. Then, perhaps, justice may be served. Though, based on recent decisions from the judiciary, that is a question unto itself. A little more jaded toward the system, I continue to seek .....
Veritas Justitias Honoris
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear VJH:
On behalf of Readers thank you very much for your time and effort researching the Law Society of Manitoba's beyond abysmal discipline of members convicted of sexual harassment.
The LSM holds a monopoly. If a person is of the belief they've been sexually harassed by a lawyer the Winnipeg police will not investigate. Using the non-emergency number we talked directly with an officer. The main reason seemed to be because such alleged incidents do not fall under any provisions of the criminal code. Therefore, you'll be referred to, yes, the Law Society.
Next it was Ombudsman Manitoba. Same response. Finally, we tried the Manitoba Human Rights Commission multiple times but when we followed prompt one, as directed to file a complaint, the number at the other end rang repeatedly without answer. However, it's reasonable to assume we would have likely received the same response.
Where the police refuse to take action, a procedure exists whereby a private citizen can complete a form, send it to the Prosecutions Branch of Manitoba Justice to request a charge be laid. You could conceivably find yourself before a Queen's Bench judge trying to convince them the matter should be considered by the courts. Private prosecutions are extremely rare but a handful have occurred in Canada over the years. Good luck trying to take an LSM member to QB on a sexual harassment charge!
Ms Leonoff was no more than a couple sentences into her oral decision when we turned to the gentleman seated beside us to whisper, "This is going to be a tiny slap on the wrist.' He nodded in agreement. Sure enough. Much has been made by The Law Society of Mr. King's reprimand. Question. Are reprimands like pardons in that in "x" years Anthony King can apply to the LSM to have it expunged from his record?
Your next research project VJH. It is our considered opinion The Law Society of Manitoba's treatment of sexual harassment complaints is a joke!
Sincerely,
Clare L. Pieuk
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 10:45 AM
1 Comments:
Good Afternoon Mr. Pieuk,
A minor research project, but valuable to be sure.
Pursuant to the Law Society of Manitoba Rules, the following are the requirements for a pardon:
Application for a pardon
5-101.1(1) Subject to subsection (2), in circumstances where:
(a) a member’s conduct was censured by the Complaints Investigation Committee and the
member accepted a formal caution; or
(b) a discipline panel found a member guilty of professional misconduct or conduct
unbecoming a lawyer or student or incompetence and imposed a reprimand or fine, with
or without an order of costs, and no other order, action or penalty was imposed on the
member by the discipline panel as a result of that conviction,
the member may apply to the discipline committee for a pardon. (ENACTED 03/05)
Application criteria
5-101.1(3) At the time a member makes an application under subsection (1), the following criteria
must be satisfied:
(a) ten years have passed since the date of the censure or conviction;
(b) since the date of the censure or conviction the member has not accepted any other formal
cautions and has not been found guilty of any other charges of professional misconduct,
conduct unbecoming a lawyer or student or incompetence;
(c) there are no charges pending against the member;
(d) there are no complaints about the member under investigation;
(e) the member has paid the society all money owing by the member to the society; and
(f) a discipline panel has not granted any previous application by the member under this rule.
Basically, behave for a decade (and/or fly under the radar) and you can apply to have your reprimand erased. However, considering how many lawyers have been disciplined, there are very few pardons. Perhaps the LSM should take this as an indication that the current state of punishment of the membership is insufficient as they cannot manage to behave for a decade post reprimand?
Still disgusted by the legal community of Manitoba, I remain…
Veritas Justitias Honoris
Post a Comment
<< Home