Sudbury News: Criminal charges against Labour Ministry and five others suspended over 2006 mine fatality

The director of Ontario’s Complex Prosecutions Bureau told court Wednesday that he would suspend prosecution against the Ministry of Labour and five other individuals in connection with a fatal mining accident in 2006.

John Corelli told the court that because of the complexity of the case, the FBI needed time to assess whether a charge of involuntary manslaughter had a reasonable chance of success.

By staying the charges, prosecutors have up to a year to decide whether to proceed with prosecution.

The incident dates back to May 25, 2006, when Raymond Campeau was working 2,000 feet underground at the Podolsky Mine in Capreol. A winch he was trying to repair exploded, sending metal fragments flying at high speeds.

Campeau’s legs were seriously injured and he died 90 minutes later. His widow, Fay Smith, successfully sued the province in 2018, arguing that a Ministry of Labour inspector had identified the winch as a significant safety hazard and ordered the problem to be fixed.

However, the lawsuit alleges that the ministry failed to comply with orders, which led to her husband’s death.

The current charges were brought by Smith as a private prosecution. A Sudbury justice of the peace ruled in March that there was sufficient evidence to proceed.

In addition to the Department of Labor, defendants in the case included Dan Beaulieu, then an inspector at the department, former Dynatec Corp., Chris Stewart, Terry Jibbs and Stylianos Kontonikolas.

The prosecution was based on the so-called Westray Act, which allows for the criminal prosecution of companies and their representatives for violations of the law that result in serious injury or death.

In June, the Sudbury District Attorney’s Office announced it would take over prosecution and subsequently transferred the case to the Complex Prosecutions Bureau to avoid any appearance of bias.

Otherwise, it would have been the Sudbury Crown that would have prosecuted the Sudbury Division of the Ministry of Labour.

On Wednesday in Sudbury, Corelli said the stay of charges would give them time to gather first-hand information.

“These charges were not the result of a police investigation,” he told Ontario Court Judge Leonard Kim.

At this point, Corelli said, it would not make sense to ask the court to allocate time to a case where it was not certain whether he would be prosecuted.

Evaluate each case individually

By staying the proceedings, they could ask the police for help if necessary and review the case against each accused defendant, Corelli said.

Although their clients are no longer formally facing charges, the defendants’ lawyers said they were not happy that they had not yet received “the slightest” insight into the facts of the case and that their clients were in legal limbo until a final decision was made.

But Kim replied that it was the prosecutor’s duty not to pursue a case if he was not convinced that there was a reasonable prospect of success.

Michael Lacy, Fay Smith’s attorney, told CTV News in an email that Corelli’s office had been provided with the information and evidence collected in support of his private prosecution.

“To our knowledge, the prosecutor’s decision to stay the charges today is intended to allow Mr. Correlli’s office the opportunity to continue to review the materials we have provided as well as other information and evidence,” Lacy said.

“Fay has been waiting for justice in this case for a long time. She was optimistic that Mr. Correlli’s office would be able to confirm today that charges would be filed. But she does not want a hasty decision to be made without carefully reviewing the information we have provided to the Crown.”

“She is confident that by pausing the criminal proceedings, every effort will be made to make an objective decision on the matter as quickly as possible,” Lacy added.

Lacy’s full statement on the decision:

“As you know, this case has a long history. Fay has been working to ensure justice is done in connection with her husband’s death for nearly two decades. She has always maintained that charges should have been brought against those responsible following the initial police investigation, but the Sudbury District Attorney’s Office concluded that there was no basis to bring charges at that time. Eventually, Fay went to court herself, appeared before a Justice of the Peace, and the criminal negligence charge was allowed to proceed to trial. Because these charges are indictable offenses, it is the District Attorney’s policy that the charges cannot be prosecuted by a private individual or private attorney.

“Initially, the local prosecutor’s office intervened and wanted to make a decision on whether to pursue the charges. On behalf of Fay, we wrote to the Attorney General requesting that counsel independent of the Sudbury office and the Attorney General make that decision. The Attorney General decided that the matter should be reviewed by Mr. Corelli’s office. We provided his office and the attorney conducting the review with the information and evidence Fay had compiled in support of the charges, along with a letter outlining the legal basis and liability of each person/entity charged.

“To our knowledge, the prosecutor’s decision to stay the charges today is intended to give Mr. Correlli’s office the opportunity to further review the materials we have provided as well as other information and evidence. The stay puts the charges on hold for up to one year until the prosecutor’s office decides what to do.

“Fay has long waited for justice in this case. She was optimistic that Mr. Correlli’s office would be able to confirm that charges will be filed today. However, she does not want a hasty decision to be made without carefully reviewing the information we have provided to the prosecution. She hopes that during the disruption to prosecution caused by the adjournment, every effort will be made to make an objective decision on the matter as quickly as possible.”