Goudge Inquiry: Smith Not Cooperating, Commission Counsel Say;

"...WHILE COMMISSION COUNSEL MUST REMAIN IMPARTIAL, IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THEY GET TO THE BOTTOM OF WHAT HAPPENED WITHOUT BEING DEFLECTED BY WITNESSES WHO HAVE A PARTICULAR INTEREST IN THE OUTCOME."

FROM FACTUM FILED BY COMMISSION COUNSEL LINDA ROTHSTEIN AND ROBERT CENTA ON DR. CHARLES SMITH'S MOTION TO BE EXAMINED FIRST BY HIS OWN LAWYERS;

Dr. Charles Smith has turned down counsel for the Goudge Inquiry's request for an interview before he gives his testimony.

Smith's refusal to cooperate with counsel is set out in a factum filed with the Commission by counsel Linda Rothstein and Robert Centa, on Smith's motion to be led through his direct testimony by his own lawyers instead of Commission Counsel. (See previous posting: "Smith to testify Jan. 28: His lawyers seek special procedure.")

"Commission counsel served a summons to witness upon Dr. Smith that requires him to attend as a witness during the week of January 28, 2008," the factum says.

"Commission counsel asked to interview Dr. Smith prior to his testimony," the factum continues.

"He has offered to respond to written questions posed to him by Commission counsel.

Dr. Smith takes the position that if his counsel is permitted to examine him first, "there is no need for Commission counsel to meet with Dr. Smith in advance of his testimony."

But Rothstein and Centa go on to argue that, "the fact that Dr. Smith has declined to be interviewed by Commission counsel is no reason to be examined first by his own counsel."

Other reasons advanced by Commission counsel against Dr. Smith's motion that his counsel be permitted to examine him first include:

0: The rules of procedure adopted by the Commission make clear that, "...in the ordinary course, Commission counsel will call and question witnesses who testify at the Inquiry.";

0: "It is the fundamental role of Commission counsel to elicit all evidence in a full, fair and complete fashion."

0: "...while Commission counsel must remain impartial, it is important that they get to the bottom of what happened without being deflected by witnesses who have a particular interest in the outcome".

0: "Moreover, the fact that Dr. Smith will be an important witness at the inquiry is all the more reason why Commission counsel should examine him fully and thoroughly. The Commissioner should first hear Dr. Smith's evidence "unvarnished by the perspective of someone with an interest in a particular outcome" of this inquiry."

Harold Levy;