68.
80
ns of
Mr. Justice Macdougall recalled that Moor gave some indication that the Police did not want any all victimization to occur, because this was a "properly-run investigation". Moor said it was quite possible that he did say words to that effect, because this was his view of the MacLennan investigation, and remained his view. The Attorney General, however, could not recollect this conversation one way or the other.
69.
During the discussion, Moor had the files in front of him. Neither the Attorney General nor Mr. Macdougall could recall reading these files at the meeting. Probably Moor took the files away after the discussion. The Attorney General and Mr. Macdougall had not advised any arrest action regarding Logan and MacLennan at the meeting.2
70.
28
On 3 December 1979, both the MacLennan and the Logan Prosecution Files were Brought to Macdougall by Brooks and MacKillop. After reading the files, Macdougall discussed with Brooks and MacKillop the evidence and the quality of the witnesses and their credibility. Brooks and MacKillop pointed out to Macdougall that there were discrepancies in the evidence, particularly as to dates. These were discussed and Macdougall did not consider that such discrepancies were particularly material when weighed against the other available evidence. He was satisfied that there was a ring of truth and consistency to the allegations and that there was a good prima facie case against MacLennan (and also Logan). Macdougall was also informed by Brooks that MacLennan had not been targetted but that his name had surfaced during the course of their investigations into procuration and that they followed up the leads from there. Brooks' information was clearly incorrect (see the Section dealing with Peter).
71.
Macdougall then excused himself from the meeting and went over to discuss the cases briefly with the Attorney General, the reason being that there had been a previous meeting between the Attorney General and Moor on 30 November. He briefly discussed the evidence with the Attorney General and informed him that he had formed the view there was sufficient evidence to warrant arrest and prosecution of both MacLennan and Logan. The Attorney General asked him "if there were any problems" and Macdougall said that he did not foresee any. He was told by the Attorney General to "go ahead".29 Brooks and MacKillop were so informed. Brooks later recorded on page 3 of the Prosecution File on MacLennan the following:-
“1430 hrs-1615 hrs 3 December 1979
Discussed this case. R. L. Brooks, Mr. N. Macdougall, Crown Prosecutor and N. MacKillop. A further discussion between Crown Prosecutor and Attorney General resulted in Attorney General advice to arrest MacLennan and Logan on the available evidence."
Brooks said in evidence that the instruction was that once the files had been finalized for court purposes, arrest action could be carried out. Moor was also informed by Clancy of the Attorney General's decision.
72.
73. It was decided by the Attorney General that Logan should be prosecuted first because of security reasons, and he was arrested by the SIU two days later on 5 December 1979. He was charged with three counts of gross indecency, to which he entered pleas of guilty on 13 December 1979 at the Western Magistracy, and was discharged upon payment of $600 costs the next day. Soon after his arrest, Logan complained that he had been blackmailed by a total of five male prostitutes, three of whom were potential witnesses against MacLennan. As a result, legal advice was sought with a view to re-assessing the credibility of these three witnesses in the light of Logan's allegations.
74.
In the meantime the investigation into MacLennan still continued. Further enquiries were made of male prostitutes who had admitted acts of gross indecency with MacLennan. They were located. They were: Bobby, Lula, Jimmy and Wicky.
75.
Brooks was aware that MacLennan had been told, prior to January 1980, about the SIU investigation into him. Brooks knew from information received through one of SIU's rank and file which came originally from Peter, that he knew another of the prostitutes had been to see MacLennan. In his statement of 17 January 1980 Brooks said MacLennan had reportedly tried to contact witnesses in an attempt to persuade them not to give evidence. He later admitted in evidence that this was wrong.
76.
Brooks suggested to Ross that surveillance of MacLennan was necessary. Ross agreed and arranged this to be done on three separate dates, namely, 13 December 1979, 19 December 1979 and 21 December 1979. The surveillance was carried out because of the possibility that MacLennan was either communicating with witnesses or witnesses were trying to approach him (for blackmail or just to warn him), or that if there was any evidence that he was seen in a compromising position that would help SIU's case. 30 The surveillance proved nothing more than that MacLennan was in the habit of staying out drinking into the early hours of the morning. Brooks also ordered that MacLennan be placed on the watch list.
28
The Minute on page 3 of the MacLennan's Prosecution File is incorrect as it stated that the Attorney General had advised arrest action on 30 November 1979.
29
See Transcript page 10970.
30
See Transcript page 7887.
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.