James faces revoke of pardon

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 15/10/2010 (5760 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

OTTAWA — The mere presence of new criminal allegations against convicted sex offender Graham James means his controversial pardon could be revoked, The Canadian Press has learned.

James, a former junior hockey coach, faces nine new counts of sexually abusing teenage players under his influence over a period that stretched from 1979 into the mid-1990s.

The charge sheet, filed Wednesday in a Winnipeg court, includes allegations from three new complainants, including former NHL star Theoren Fleury. The other two complainants can’t be named due to a publication ban.

James, who pleaded guilty to hundreds of assaults on two teenage boys in 1997, was quietly pardoned in 2007.

The pardon — when exposed by The Canadian Press last spring — sent shock waves right up to the Prime Minister’s Office and led to new legislation to tighten up the pardon system.

But James’ pardon, which wiped his convictions from the Canadian Police Information Centre database, remained in effect. That could soon change.

The Criminal Records Act authorizes the National Parole Board to revoke a pardon on several grounds, including a subsequent conviction, but also a broad category indicating “the recipient is no longer of good conduct.”

Caroline Douglas, communications director for the Parole Board of Canada, said a conviction is not needed to revoke a pardon — the act of laying charges, especially charges similar to the pardoned offence, can spur the board to act.

She stressed she could not discuss any individual case, but said it is not necessary for police or other authorities to request a pardon be revoked. The board, she said, can act on its own.

“We have a broad authority,” she said. “We’re not a policing body, but information is typically brought to our attention and it can be brought to our attention in various ways. Then the board has to make a determination what to do with that information and whether a board member takes a look at it.”

Former NHL forward Sheldon Kennedy, one of Graham’s victims as a youth, was pleased by the latest development. Graham is believed to be living in Mexico.

“I think it’s good. It would probably give Mexican authorities a chance to put pressure on Graham or boot him out of the country,” Kennedy said in a telephone interview with the Free Press.

Kennedy is confident the pardon will now be revoked. Kennedy has turned his ordeal into a program called Respect in Sport, which is mandatory for every coach in every sport in Manitoba and is spreading to other provinces. Close to 25,000 people in Manitoba have gone through the program in the past four years.

Fleury is also hopeful.

“As a nation, we were all shocked that he got a pardon in the first place, but this is good news,” Fleury told the Free Press. “I certainly hope they do revoke it because of the charges.”

While the Criminal Records Act does not define “good conduct,” the board issued the following guideline examples:

— “Information about an incident that resulted in a charge that was subsequently withdrawn, stayed or dismissed… “

— “The relevance of this information increases where the charge or charges are of a serious nature, and/or are related to the convictions on the record for which the pardon is requested.”

— “Information provided by law-enforcement agencies about suspected or alleged criminal behaviour.”

— “With respect to applicants convicted of a sex offence prosecuted by way of indictment, any information received from law-enforcement agencies further to inquiries made by the board.”

James, 58, was sentenced to 3 1/2 years in prison in 1997 after his guilty plea for sex offences involving Kennedy and another unnamed individual.

The latest charge sheet against James — covering a period from 1979 to 1994 — includes new allegations of gross indecency, sexual assault, indecent assault and attempt to commit buggery.

Statistics provided by the National Parole Board show that over the past five years, 54 pardons have been revoked for serious offences.

Pardons for sexual offences have only been tracked separately since 2008, and in the two full years of record-keeping, none has been revoked.

 

— The Canadian Press, with files from Bill Redekop and Gabrielle Giroday