MANDEL: Ex-Ontario judge thought he was above the law
· Toronto Sun
Based on the findings of the Ontario Judicial Council, it seems that former Ontario Court Justice Paul Currie thought he was above the law. So what a fall he’s had from the mighty judicial perch he once held.
Visit iwanktv.club for more information.
When a distraught woman called 911 in April 2023 and reported Currie had broken her wrist, she confided that she didn’t want to get him in trouble because he was a “very famous judge.”
“Well,” the operator so wisely replied, “that doesn’t mean that he’s allowed to do that though, right?”
Right, indeed.
In a brief summary decision in January, a disciplinary panel found that on a “balance of probabilities,” Currie had sexually assaulted the woman, broke her wrist and for days, delayed turning himself in to police because he didn’t want to be stuck in crowded Maplehurst detention centre over the Easter long weekend.
Found guilty of five of six allegations of misconduct , the 71-year-old former regional senior justice for the central west region decided to retire before he could be disciplined by the Ontario Judicial Council.
Disciplinary panel releases detailed report on guilty finding
Unfortunately for the disgraced ex-judge, the story hasn’t gone away. This week, the disciplinary panel released its detailed 100-page report on why they believe he was guilty of judicial misconduct, finding his account often “evasive, disingenuous, and lacking in credibility.”
The woman, who can only be identified as A.A., testified at the hearing last year that Currie was struggling with alcohol and would regularly drink and drive. The more he drank, she said, the more explosive he became.
“Over maybe years, you know … he just got progressively angrier and more rageful and darker,” she testified.
On Jan. 15, 2023, she said Currie had been drinking and arguing with her about past text messages she’d exchanged with a colleague. After she’d gone to sleep, she said he came into the bedroom and sexually and physically assaulted her in a rage, leaving her with bruises and jaw pain.
“I’m so, so sorry. I never meant to hurt you,” she said he told her crying the next morning.
“I should go to jail. I should be arrested. I should lose my job. I’m so, so sorry,” she testified he said.
He promised to get help, she said.
Then on April 5 of that year, she said Currie had been drinking and they were having another argument when he pushed her from behind causing her to fall and break her wrist. This time, she called 911.
Currie was accused of knowing there was a warrant for his arrest, but he delayed turning himself in until five days later.
Criminal charges were withdrawn
She never wanted him arrested but was told it was out of her hands.
The charges of assault causing bodily harm and assault were soon withdrawn after prosecutors said there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. The Judicial Council then launched its investigation.
Currie denied all of her allegations, insisting she was always the aggressor.
“I did not rape (A.A.). I would not rape (A.A.), or anybody. It just didn’t happen,” he maintained.
The panel didn’t find him credible and concluded that “on a balance of probabilities” the former judge sexually and physically assaulted the woman.
The panel also rejected his “rehearsed justification” that he left the scene and ignored the warrant for his arrest because he was afraid for his safety if he had to spend the weekend at Maplehurst.
“Justice Currie unilaterally decided that the regular legal process should not apply to him,” Justice Paul Rouleau wrote on behalf of the four-member panel.
“A reasonable observer viewing Justice Currie’s conduct could only conclude that it reflects an attitude that the ordinary operation of the law, including the possibility of time spent in a jail cell pending release, should not apply to him because he is a judge.
“A judge who declines to respect the legal process cannot credibly demand the same compliance from others.”
The panel also accepted her evidence that Currie called to dissuade her from participating in what he called the Judicial Council’s “kangaroo court.”
“You can be the nail in my coffin,” she said the judge had warned her.
And luckily, she was.