Military Police Complaints Commission
FYNES PUBLIC INTEREST HEARINGS
held pursuant to section 250.38(1) of the National Defence
Act, in the matter of file 2011004
LES AUDIENCES D'INTÉRÊT PUBLIQUE SUR FYNES
tenues en vertu du paragraphe 250.38(1) de la Loi sur la
défense nationale pour le dossier 2011004
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
held at 270 Albert St., Ottawa, Ontario
on Tuesday, April 3, 2012
mardi, le 3 avril 2012
VOLUME 4
BEFORE:
Mr. Glenn Stannard Chairperson
Ms. Raymonde Cléroux Registrar
APPEARANCES:
Mr. Mark Freiman Commission counsel
Ms. Genevieve Coutlée
Ms. Elizabeth Richards For Sgt Jon Bigelow, MWO Ross Tourout,
Ms. Korinda McLaine LCol Gilles Sansterre, WO Blair Hart, PO 2 Eric McLaughlin,
Sgt David Mitchell, Sgt Matthew Alan Ritco, Maj Daniel Dandurand,
Sgt Scott Shannon, LCol Brian Frei, LCol (ret’d) William H. Garrick,
WO (ret’d) Sean Der Bonneteau, CWO (ret’d) Barry Watson
Col (ret’d) Michel W. Drapeau For Mr. Shaun Fynes
Mr. Joshua Juneau and Mrs. Sheila Fynes
Mr. James Heelan For witnesses, Dr. Sowa, Dr. Chu,
Dr. Yaltho and Dr. Elwell
A.S.A.P. Reporting Services Inc. © 2012
200 Elgin Street, Suite 1105 333 Bay Street, Suite 900
Ottawa, Ontario K2P 1L5 Toronto, Ontario M5H 2T4
(613) 564-2727 (416) 861-8720
(ii)
INDEX
PAGE
SWORN: DR. BERNARD SOWA 4
Examination In-Chief by Mr. Freiman 4
Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 84
Cross-Examination by Ms. Richards 92
Re-Examination by Mr. Freiman 119
Re Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 120
SWORN: DR. JACK CHU 123
Examination In-Chief by Mr. Freiman 123
Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 165
Cross-Examination by Ms. Mclaine 174
Re-Examination by Mr. Freiman 184
Re Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 186
SWORN: SHANNON NEWING 189
Examination In-Chief by Ms. Coutlée 189
Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 210
Cross-Examination by Ms. Mclaine 211
Re-Examination by Ms. Coutlée 228
Re Cross-Examination by Colonel Drapeau 232
(iii)
LIST OF EXHIBITS
NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
P-1 Collection A, addition to Volume 1. 1
P-4 Collection D, addition to Volume 14. 1
P-5 Collection E, Volumes 4 to 7. 1
P-6 Collection F, Volume 2. 2
P-8 Witness book index for Dr. Sowa. 2
P-9 The witness book index for Dr. Chu. 2
P-10 Witness book index for Ms. Shannon Newing. 2
P-11 Product monogram of the drug called Seroquel. 3
137
Ottawa, Ontario
ASAP Reporting Services Inc.
(613) 564-2727 (416) 861-8720
137
Upon resuming on Tuesday, April 3, 2012,
at 9:30 a.m.
THE CHAIRPERSON: Good morning. Do we have any outstanding issues or anything before we start today?
MS. COUTLÉE: Mr. Chairman, we will enter our remaining exhibits at this time.
So we have Collection A, addition to Volume 1.
THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit P1.
EXHIBIT NO. P1: Collection A, addition to Volume 1.
MS. COUTLÉE: Collection D, addition to Volume 14.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P4.
EXHIBIT NO. P4: Collection D, addition to Volume 14.
MS. COUTLÉE: Collection E, Volumes 4 to 7.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P5.
EXHIBIT NO. P5: Collection E, Volumes 4 to 7.
MS. COUTLÉE: Collection F, Volume 2.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P6.
EXHIBIT NO. P6: Collection F, Volume 2.
MS. COUTLÉE: We will also enter the witness book index for Dr. Sowa.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P8.
EXHIBIT NO. P8: Witness book index for Dr. Sowa.
MS. COUTLÉE: The witness book index for Dr. Chu.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P9.
EXHIBIT NO. P9: The witness book index for Dr. Chu.
MS. COUTLÉE: And the witness book index for Ms. Shannon Newing.
THE REGISTRAR: Exhibit P10.
EXHIBIT NO. P10: Witness book index for Ms. Shannon Newing.
MS. COUTLÉE: We have also been advised that counsel for the complainants have an exhibit they wish to enter.
COLONEL DRAPEAU: Mr. Chair, yes, I do. It's a product monogram of the drug called Seroquel, which I may rely on in the crossexamination of Dr. Chu, and only Dr. Chu.
THE REGISTRAR: It will be Exhibit P11.
EXHIBIT NO. P11: Product monogram of the drug called Seroquel.
THE CHAIRPERSON: Have copies been distributed on that
MS. COUTLÉE: Yes, it has, Mr. Chair.
THE CHAIRPERSON: to the registrar?
Did we have a P7, or did I miss that?
THE REGISTRAR: Yes, that was the exhibit for the main index book for Major Hannah last Tuesday.
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you.
And before we start, I see Mr. Juneau is back with us, and we have another counsel, Ms. Richards.
MR. HEELAN: Yes, good morning. My name is James Heelan, I am with the law firm of Bennett Jones. I will be here for the next two days. I am here on behalf of Dr. Sowa this morning, Dr. Chu this afternoon. I will also be here tomorrow on behalf of Dr. Elwell and also on behalf of Dr. Yaltho, who is scheduled for tomorrow as well.
THE CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you.
MR. HEELAN: Thank you.
THE CHAIRPERSON: I believe we are ready to start.
MR. FREIMAN: Good morning to everybody. Our next witness is Dr. Bernard Sowa.
SWORN: DR. BERNARD SOWA
EXAMINATION INCHIEF BY MR. FREIMAN:
Q. Dr. Sowa, I believe you have been sworn, so we will simply proceed.
Before we begin, Mr. Chairman, I think it's probably opportune for me to remind myself and those around us that the next two days we will be hearing some medical evidence designed to help us understand the medical background, understand the condition, the challenges that Corporal Langridge faced, to understand some of the treatment that he got, to understand what the military would have known, what it would not have known, and what the challenges were that were to face the military in dealing with Corporal Langridge given the medical conditions.
In the course of exploring these matters, we will have to tread lightly on personal issues that, in my view, are irrelevant to the larger questions that we are dealing with today, and it's going to be my effort to preserve the dignity of all those involved, both Corporal Langridge and his memory and members of his family and his family circle who, in the course of the interviews with medical personnel, may have divulged personal details that are of no interest to us in these proceedings.
I also remind myself that our focus is squarely on Corporal Langridge and his challenges and understanding those, understanding the treatments that he got, their nature and perhaps their limitations. This is not a forum to review the treatment on a standard of professional conduct. That's for another forum, if at all. And I remind myself of that as we proceed as well.
Dr. Sowa, I understand you are a physician licensed to practice in the province of Alberta and that you are certified as a specialist in psychiatry?
A. Yes, I am.
Q. Can you help us to understand your background by just taking us briefly through your educational career and your professional career down to today?
A. Okay, so I am originally from Ghana, which is in West Africa, and that is where I had my primary medical degree. Worked for four years, and then came to the University of Alberta residency program in psychiatry from 1980 to 1984.
Since that time, I have basically been either at the Alberta Hospital Edmonton or on staff at the University Hospital Edmonton, up until just about four years ago when I moved to Calgary to the Foothills Hospital.
So at the University of Alberta, I, of course, was engaged in clinical practice, both office and inpatient work, as well as outpatient clinics. Also engaged in teaching, and so I, by 1998, had risen to a full clinical professor in the department. And I have the same position at the Foothills in University of Calgary in the last four years.
So that's been my career.
Q. And you won't want me to say this, but I feel constrained to say it: You also have a reputation as being one of the most respected psychiatrists in the province of Alberta, a reputation that I have encountered numerous discussions with other members of the profession.
Now, Dr. Sowa, you first encountered Stuart Langridge on February the 4th or the 5th, 2008; do you recall that circumstance?
A. Yes. So the first I would have seen him would have been on Unit 102 at Alberta Hospital.
Q. What is Unit 102?
A. It's one of the acute adult psychiatric units there for acutely ill psychiatric patients. So to clarify, it meant I didn't admit him to the hospital, that would have been done by the duty doctor the day before.
And so he arrives on the unit and the next day he is assigned to one of two or three psychiatrists on the unit. So it would have been my turn to take the next patient, and so that would have been how he came to my care at that time.
Q. Now, we have at Tab 43 of the documents in front of you, which, for purposes of those following in a different format, is Document 1202, pages 145 to 151. We have something that is called a "baseline", baseline what?
"Baseline Health Data" report. This may not be what I was looking for. No, it's not, sorry. Although, it may also be helpful.
Tab 24 may also be helpful to us. And Tab 24 are the full medical records, an extract from them. It's Document 1202, pages 6 to 7. I think that may actually be a little more helpful to you.
A. Which tab again, please?
Q. Tab 24.
A. Okay.
Q. And this appears to be your admission note.
With reference to that, can you tell me what you saw, what the issues were and how you decided to approach Corporal Langridge's treatment?
A. So this summarizes my observations. Clearly, a young man who had been in a lot of distress for a long time. A career with the military, having served a couple of times overseas. He was not willing to divulge the details of those services overseas and, actually, never did whilst he was in my care. It is something he just would not discuss.
But he came into our care because he had just been discharged from the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Edmonton and was still very suicidal and very depressed. And so that's how we received him, in a state of depression, anxiety and suicidal preoccupation; and so that was our admitting diagnosis.
There was also, in the background, some reference from the Alex about a possible posttraumatic stress disorder. So we obviously made a note of that. But that is things you would enquire into as you establish a working relationship with your patient.
But what struck us clearly was the depression, the anxiety, and the suicidality. So that was the first thing that we were preoccupied with. We have to stabilize him, bring down the emotional temperature and get things decompress the situation and keep him safe. So that was what we were dealing with.
In the background was also the death of his father that he was still coping with, and that was tragic in that it had been they had some distance in their relationship for a number of years, and then when they were finally getting back together is when the father died. So there were a number of unresolved issues around that.
More proximally was the breakup of a relationship, which he had described to me at admission as common law. And he was obviously quite attached, in his own way, to Rebecca, but I think because of the difficulties with his addiction problems, she was looking at ending their relationship. In fact, it was my belief that she actually stated in January that the relationship was over because he had been unable to complete a course of treatment in British Columbia where he had been sent for that.
The PTSD was another thing, that was way in the background, but something that I couldn't get to because of his reluctance with that.
So those were the issues that I was confronted with.
Q. Now, we have in the documents, and I am not sure that it's necessary to turn to it, but we have a certificate at Tab 27 which commits Corporal Langridge to a stay in the hospital.
Can you explain the reasons why a certificate would be issued and why a 30day certificate was issued in this case?
A. Well, you have to meet certain criteria in the province of Alberta, there have to be three criteria which all have to be satisfied. One is that a person has to have a major mental disorder, which, in this case, the depression, severe anxiety, and history of suicide attempts presently would satisfy.
So that he has the diagnosis of depression. He also was clearly still, at that point, a danger to himself: Not necessarily to others, but to himself. And, clearly, the best way to treat him was as a certified patient, in that if you let him voluntarily, then he would leave at any time and act out on his impulses. And he was seen as unpredictable in that situation.
So in my opinion, those criteria, all three, were met at the time that I saw him and so that led to doing a second certificate in support of the original one done by the admitting physician.
Q. Now, just to set the scene, you have told us that Corporal Langridge had recently been discharged from the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Edmonton, and he was readmitted shortly after that discharge.