.

THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE HAS APPEARED IN THE RECORD November 13, 2002

TBL criminal charge raises disturbing questions



The quiet and peaceful town of Brome Lake, which has already carved its name in the legal journals of the Supreme Court of Canada, appears to be in the process of paving the way for more high profile jurisprudence. While the case has to do with a simple charge of causing a disturbance during the November TBL council meeting, the trial is likely to dwell on a number of highly troublesome questions pertaining to the local and provincial administration of justice.

Except for who said what and when, the gist of what happened does not appear to be unduly complicated. The incident took place in the Knowlton Community Hall on Nov. 4 during the town council monthly meeting and more specifically during the question period. Approximately 25 witnesses were present, including the six councilors and the few citizens who were attending the meeting. Because the TBL council had long since adapted the practice of tape-recording their question periods, one must necessarily assume that the entire incident was recorded.

Marc Decelles, 62, the accused, is a retired income tax investigator and a longtime resident of Brome Lake. He is also well known in the community for his environmental activism, particularly with regards to the water quality of Brome Lake. As one of the few TBL citizens who has faithfully attended council meetings over the last 20 years, he has earned the reputation of addressing pointed and occasionally embarrassing questions on environmental issues, which have done little to enhance his popularity among the local councilors. The criminal charge stems from his use of "theatrics" during the question period. He apparently hoped to increase the council's awareness on the importance of banning the use of fungicides, herbicides, fertilizers and the likes, within 300 meters of Brome Lake. Paradoxically, just before the meeting began he had remitted to the council members a summary of the recommendations of his ad hoc committee pertaining to the TBL Master Plan.

When it was his turn (No. 3) to address the councilors during the question period, he left his seat wearing a pair of beige plastic surgical gloves, a painting mask around his neck and a pair of clear working goggles over his forehead and walked over to the nearby table where the six councilors were sitting. He then approached Robin Moore, the councilor responsible for TBL environmental affairs, and handed him a sealed cardboard box. He explained that inside the box was another one, which he had found in the ditch alongside Domain Brome Road and which contained, according to the label Tersan (r) 1991 Turf Fungicide. ( A Transport Canada communiqu? vailable on the Internet, describes Tersan as a "turf fungicide supplied as a wettable powder for pest control It also states that no permit is required and that the fungicide may "irritate the eyes, nose, throat and skin" and "contaminate surface water.")

Following a short conversation with Moore, who apparently was less than impressed by the theatrics, Decelles returned to his seat at which time the question period had already resumed. He remained there for approximately 20 minutes and then left the hall. As for the sealed box, it appears that as soon as Decelles returned to his seat Robin Moore placed it on the floor next to his chair. Apparently none of the councilors believed it was necessary to remove the box from the room since it remained near their table throughout the entire meeting. No one left the room as a result of Decelles's intervention and at no time did any of the councilors recommend that the meeting be suspended or that the hall be evacuated.

Two days later, while Decelles was attending an unrelated meeting with the TBL town clerk, local police chief, Richard Burcombe, informed Decelles that an arrest warrant had been issued against him the day before. Decelles was then told to meet him at the courthouse at 10 a.m. in order to proceed with his arraignment.

It was subsequently ascertained that after the council meeting a complaint was made to the TBL municipal police force. A local police officer was dispatched and preceded to obtain a number of written statements from the councilors. However, it appears that the TBL police officer was unaware of the council's custom of tape recording their meetings and therefore did not take possession of the tape. On Nov.5 the local prosecutor authorized a criminal charge against Decelles for having caused a disturbance during the TBL council meeting and at the same time recommended that an arrest warrant be issued. As instructed, Decelles presented himself at the Cowansville courthouse on Nov. 7 and was arraigned before a justice of the peace in the presence of the local prosecutor, Me Bernard Monast, and Richard Burcombe. He was given a copy of the warrant which alleged that on " or about November the 4th, 2002 in Lake Brome, District of Bedford, not being in a dwelling-house, he caused a disturbance in or near a public place, namely at the Municipal Council by impeding or molesting persons who attended the meeting of the Municipal Council as well as the members of the Council committing thereby a summary conviction offence contrary to article 175 (1) (a) (ii) of the Criminal Code."

In order to secure his release, Marc Decelles agreed in writing to a series of conditions, which included a promise not to attend TBL council meetings, not to communicate with Councilor Robin Moore and to remit any firearm that he owned to the local police.

Decelles is to appear in court this Friday at which time the prosecutor should be in a position to provide him with a copy of all of the witness statements. He is not likely to receive a copy of the analysis of the substance since no analysis was apparently requested by the police. Failing a request for a complementary investigation, the SQ considers the investigation to be the sole responsibility of the TBL Municipal Police. As for the tape, assuming it still exists and the prosecutor decides to produce it as evidence, a prior notification must be given to Decelles with a copy of the transcript.

On the other hand it is reasonable to assume that Marc Decelles's attorney will insist on obtaining a copy of the tape as it would constitute not only the best evidence but the most convincing evidence capable of resolving any dispute as to who said what and when during the incident.

Next week : Part II : Legal issues and troublesome questions