Canadian Lawyer

26 J A N U A R Y 2 0 1 6 w w w . C A N A D I A N L a w y e r m a g . c o m Alberta Court of Queen's Bench Chief Justice Neil Wittmann, who as vice chairman of the judicial conduct committee was considering the complaint against her, would quickly accept her explanations about what happened with Chapman and the photos. Her optimism, however, began to vanish after she learned the judicial council had accepted an anonymous submission of a disc containing the photos. Then she learned it had sent them to Witt- mann and the chief justice of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench at the time, Marc Monnin, who now sits on the Manitoba Court of Appeal. "I just collapsed when I realized those two people had looked at them," she says. In the fall of 2010, she took a five-week medical leave and prepared to come back to work in the new year. She refused when Monnin suggested she should continue her medical leave. But things changed when her counterpart on the civil side, Justice Glenn Joyal, became chief justice following Monnin's appointment to the appeal court. According to Douglas, Joyal told her she'd have no further duties with the court. "That's when I had the rest of the crash. I got more and more depressed. I was stuck in the house. I had nothing," says Douglas, noting her situation changed her per- spective on the idea of house arrest for criminals rather than jail. "Got to tell you, I'll never criticize that again. It felt like a prison." Douglas says she'd experience panic every morning. She relied on friends to help her get through the day. Once King would leave the house, they'd call. And if she could make it to noon, the panic would go away. Without that support, she says, she would have committed suicide. "I lost my job. I lost my life. I lost my reputa- tion. If it hadn't been for my son, there would have been little reason to keep on." So much of Douglas' anger comes back to the photos. Noting people like Guy Pratte, the lawyer who initially served as indepen- dent counsel during the CJC proceedings, and his staff would have seen the photos, Douglas compares the situation to repeated rape. "What it felt like is the torture that's inflicted in war on women," she says. "It hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt, hurt like agony when I had to be interviewed by people who had looked at them." Even for Sheila Block, the battle-hardened litigator at Torys LLP who acted for Douglas during the CJC proceedings, the case took its toll. "I lost 13 pounds. It's not a diet I'd recommend. . . . I couldn't sleep," she says, noting the case and the concern over the photos continued to cause distress for her and the two other Torys lawyers on the case, Molly Reynolds and Sarah Whitmore. "Every time we thought they wouldn't do something, they did it," says Block. "It was very taxing emotionally." The case, of course, wasn't only about the photos. Among the allegations against Douglas was that she failed to disclose the situation with Chapman in a personal history form for her judicial appointment application; she was incapable as a judge because the nude photos question "the image and concept of integrity of the judiciary;" and she didn't fully disclose facts to independent counsel by modifying a personal diary entry relevant to the investigation. Given the criticisms of Douglas and other lawyers, Cana- dian Lawyer actively sought comment from the CJC about the issues raised. When contacted, executive director and senior gen- eral counsel Norman Sabourin expressed concern that the article wouldn't give sufficient coverage of the CJC's perspective. "We have advised Lori Douglas that if she does come out with her version of the events, the CJC will come out with its own version of the events," he says. In the end, Sabourin chose not to give an interview. The CJC did institute new procedures and bylaws governing the judicial conduct review process in July 2015, describing them as "designed to make the process more efficient and effective, while preserving judicial independence and fairness for both the complainants and the judges." On the issue of disclosing the matter at the time of her appoint- ment to the bench in 2005, Douglas says she felt comfortable answering no to a question on one of the forms that asked whether there was anything she should disclose that could have a negative impact on her. "I answered no," she says. "I said everybody knew, and it's true," she adds, referring to rumours and discussions about King's settlement with Chapman dating back to 2003. Further, Douglas notes former justice Martin Freedman of the Manitoba Court of Appeal was aware as well. At the time, he served on the judicial advisory committee for Manitoba and, according to Douglas, he said he had alerted the federal justice minister's office about the issue. In testimony in 2012 before the judicial council, Freedman said he was aware of the issue at the time and noted he had shared it with the committee. "There was a candidate for judicial office who, by all accounts, was an excellent candidate but regarding whom there was this situation that was arguably very important, and it was something that the committee had to know about," he testified. The result, Freedman noted, was the committee merely recommended Douglas for an appointment rather than designating her as highly recommended. Freedman said the committee then notified a senior federal official, Margaret-Rose Jamieson, about the issue. "We wanted to flag this information for the minister's attention because it was an unusual situation, to say the least," said Freedman. According to Douglas, she then got a call from Jamieson. "I answered every single one of her questions," she says, adding Jamie- son told her there were no concerns about appointing her. Freedman noted he had been aware since 2003 of rumours about the photos and an incident in which King, who was then at a prominent Winnipeg law firm, had attempted to solicit a client

• Cover