Share this Story: 'You are free to leave': How the case against Mark Norman ended 'You are free to leave': How the case against Mark Norman ended Photo by Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS Article content OTTAWA — Vice-Admiral Mark Norman had walked up to the entrance of the Ottawa courthouse dozens of previous times over the past year, yet this time was different: This would be the last time. Like on all those other occasions, the military’s former second-in-command was dressed in full uniform as he approached the courthouse’s heavy glass doors with his wife Beverly and lawyers Marie Henein and Christine Mainville. We apologize, but this video has failed to load. tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or 'You are free to leave': How the case against Mark Norman ended Back to video Just outside the doors, he was greeted by an unexpected supporter: outgoing Liberal MP and former lieutenant-general Andrew Leslie, who was revealed just last week as a potential defence witness. “General,” Norman said. “Good morning. Good to see you.” “Morning, Admiral,” Leslie replied, shaking Norman’s hand and giving him a brief embrace. Courtroom 37 was already packed with journalists, supporters and a group of students by the time Norman and his team arrived and took their seats near the front. A few minutes later, everyone stood as Justice Heather Perkins-McVey entered. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content And then federal Crown prosecutor Barbara Mercier stood and delivered a history lesson about the case. How it all started with “obvious leaks to the media” about a cabinet decision in November 2015, delaying sole-source contract with Quebec-based Davie Shipbuilding for an interim support ship for the navy. How those leaks “really had serious effects and it did cause concern for the government,” which prompted an internal probe, which led to an RCMP investigation that included interviews with 30 witnesses. How the Public Prosecution Service of Canada “did a thorough analysis of the evidence and the law” and made a “considered decision to lay the charge of breach-of-trust against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman” in March 2018. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content How prosecutors believed then that they had a reasonable prospect of conviction, even though the bar for proving without a reasonable doubt any crime has occurred is “rightfully high,” and is even higher with breach of trust. And then, Mercier continued, how Norman’s lawyers came forward with “a volume of information” in March that “provided greater context to the conduct of Vice-Admiral Norman” and revealed “a number of complexities in the process.” “Based on new information, we have come to the conclusion that given the particular situation involving Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, there is no reasonable prospect of conviction,” Mercier concluded. “It continues to be our view that some of Vice-Admiral Norman’s actions were … secretive and inappropriate,” she added. “However, inappropriate does not mean criminal.” Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content Then it was Henein’s turn. This decision, to stay the proceedings, was months in the making, Henein said, and a demonstration of Crown prosecutors’ having “acted in the highest traditions of the bar.” “There has not been a day that Vice-Admiral Norman has walked into this court that we did not have the utmost confidence that this court would be impartial,” she added, before noting that the case had been exhausting for her, for Norman and for his family. Nonetheless, “we were prepared to fight to the end,” Henein said. “He did nothing inappropriate. He did nothing criminal.” And then, after many months of silence, it was Norman’s turn to rise and address the court. His comments focused on thanking Perkins-McVey and the court staff. Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Article content “My only regret,” he told the judge, “is that we would have met under different circumstances.” Perkins-McVey was the last to speak, and she reflected on how only the day before, she had received yet another package of documents from the government to review and decide whether they were relevant to the case and should be released. “I know that all counsel have worked very hard to get to the point and that this decision was made after much reflection and consideration,” she said. “Vice-Admiral Norman, you entered a plea of not guilty. You are presumed to be innocent and you remain so. You are free to leave.” Share this article in your social network Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Shopping essentials Advertisement Story continues below This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. NP Posted Sign up to receive the daily top stories from the National Post, a division of Postmedia Network Inc. Email Address There was an error, please provide a valid email address. By clicking on the sign up button you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. You may unsubscribe any time by clicking on the unsubscribe link at the bottom of our emails. Postmedia Network Inc. | 365 Bloor Street East, Toronto, Ontario, M4W 3L4 | 416-383-2300 Thanks for signing up! A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it please check your junk folder. The next issue of NP Posted will soon be in your inbox. We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again Trending<doc-sep>Sean Kilpatrick/CP Vice Admiral Mark Norman reacts during a press conference in Ottawa on May 8, 2019. OTTAWA — Vice-Admiral Mark Norman says he has an "important story to tell Canadians" in the coming days after federal prosecutors stayed their criminal case against him. "Not to lay blame, but to ensure that we all learn from this experience," Norman told reporters Wednesday during a press conference at a downtown Navy officers' mess. Watch: Defence minister says taxpayers will foot Mark Norman's legal bill The military's former second-in-command faced a breach-of-trust charge related to a leaked cabinet decision to delay the signing of a sole-sourced contract to retrofit a Navy ship with Quebec-based Chantier Davie. Norman's trial, which was scheduled to begin in mid-August, was poised to become a political headache for Liberals ahead of this fall's election. Here's a brief explainer of the complex case. How did it start? Shortly after the Liberals won a majority government, cabinet held a meeting on Nov. 19, 2015 to discuss a shipbuilding contract negotiated under the previous Conservative government. Cabinet decided that the sole-sourced contract, initially given to Davie, merited additional review. Cabinet decided to pause the Davie contract until more consultations with competitors could be done. News of that decision was leaked to CBC News the next day, triggering an RCMP investigation into the source of the disclosure that eventually produced evidence to draw a circle around Norman's name. Fred Chartrand/CP Prime Minister Justin Trudeau holds a news conference with his cabinet after they were sworn-in at Rideau Hall on Nov. 4, 2015. Weeks later, details of a cabinet decision regarding a shipbuilding deal was leaked to media. The CBC News reporter who broke the story was hired by the government in January 2016 to be a "senior policy advisor" to Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan. He has since left the department. General Johnathan Vance issued a notice in January 2017 suspending Vice-Admiral Norman from his duties "effective immediately." Before Norman was charged, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau raised eyebrows by saying the investigation would "inevitably" spark "court processes." Norman was charged with breach of trust in March 2018. What's the big deal about this case? The trial was set to begin in August, and continue throughout the election campaign. The possibility of star witnesses, including former Treasury Board president Scott Brison, Liberal MP Andrew Leslie, and former Conservative defence minister Peter MacKay being called to testify would have ensured more attention over the case. Adrian Wyld/CP Scott Brison is given a standing ovation during his farewell speech in the House of Commons on Feb. 6, 2019 in Ottawa. Brison, then the senior cabinet minister from Nova Scotia, was accused of political interference by Norman's lawyers because of his personal ties to the Irving family. Nova Scotia-based Irving Shipbuilding is the second largest shipbuilder in the country after Chantier Davie. Leslie announced last week that he won't run for re-election. The retired lieutenant-general had offered to testify for Norman at the trial. He arrived at the Ottawa courthouse Wednesday before Norman's court appearance to offer his support. Sean Kilpatrick/CP Liberal MP Andrew Leslie shakes hands with Vice Admiral Mark Norman as he arrives to court in Ottawa on May 8, 2019. MacKay's name appeared on the Crown's list of potential witnesses because the contract was negotiated under the previous Conservative government. The trial was set to begin in the wake of the SNC-Lavalin affair, which consumed the political news cycle in February and March. That affair caused significant collateral damage for the Liberal government, including the resignation of high-profile cabinet ministers Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott — and their subsequent removal from caucus. It also affected poll numbers for the Liberals and Trudeau. Why was the case dropped? The National Post broke the news Tuesday evening that the high-profile criminal case against Norman would be dropped. In court Wednesday, lead prosecutor Barbara Mercier offered a cursory explanation for the sudden shift. The defence team, she said, came forward with "a volume of information" for their review and counsel met on March 28 to discuss the new evidence. "This new information definitely provided greater context to the conduct of Vice-Admiral Norman and it revealed a number of complexities in the process that we were not aware of." Sean Kilpatrick/CP Crown Prosecutor Barbara Mercier talks to reporters as she leaves court in Ottawa following a decision on Vice-Admiral Mark Norman on May 8, 2019. Mercier said it was in the Crown's view that some of Norman's actions were "secretive and inappropriate," but not criminal. She explained the charge was being stayed because there was no longer a reasonable prospect for conviction. She emphasized the independence of the director of public prosecutions in the decision. "There was no orchestration of this charge or of this case by anyone. There was no interference whatsoever in the [Public Prosecution Service of Canada] decision to commence this prosecution or in our decision to end it today." Norman's lawyer Marie Henein later told reporters at a news conference that the documents provided in late March by her "all-female team" on this case included extensive interviews and their own investigation report. "Fortunately the vice-admiral didn't fire the females that he hired." Prosecutors moved in a "very responsive manner" to the evidence, Henein said. Why are parallels being drawn to SNC-Lavalin? The common denominator between the Norman case and the SNC-Lavalin affair are that both involve allegations of political interference in prosecutorial independence. In the SNC-Lavalin case, it was alleged that officials in the Prime Minister's Office attempted to sway Wilson-Raybould, when she was attorney general, to intervene in a prosecutorial case involving the Montreal-based engineering giant. Months of debate ensued between the government and the opposition over Wilson-Raybould's claim that that she faced "veiled threats" and improper pressure to go easy on SNC-Lavalin. Sean Kilpatrick/CP Independent MPs Jane Philpott and Jody Wilson-Raybould vote in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on April 9, 2019. In the Norman case, the allegation of political interference is around the disclosure of sensitive documents. His legal team asked for a waiver of cabinet confidence to have access to government documents related to the case. The government did not grant the waiver and did not evoke privilege, instead left it to the judge to decide what documents were permissible for release to Norman's legal team. Henein called the government's slow pace in disclosing documents related to the case "concerning." Watch: Norman's lawyer, Marie Henein, praises prosecutors' decision When asked to explain the similarities between SNC-Lavalin and the Norman case, she said in both examples you see "people that are involved in the justice system resist any sort of external inappropriate influences; that we know that the justice system has to stand apart and be entirely insulated from any other sorts of considerations." The resulting decision was "unimpacted from any political considerations," Henein said. It's time for the prime minister to apologize to Norman, she added. She lauded the prosecutors and judges involved in the Norman case for "acting independently" of politics and called judicial independence "a value that is very much worth fighting for." Sean Kilpatrick/CP Vice-Admiral Mark Norman sits with his lawyer Marie Henein at a press conference in Ottawa on May 8, 2019. According to Justice Heather Perkins-McVey, the latest batch of documents arrived at her desk Tuesday. She was in the process of sorting through them ahead of a scheduled appearance this week before prosecutors decided to stay the criminal charge. The sensitive government documents that have been released to Norman's legal team are unlikely to be made public. What's next? Norman is expected to share his side of the story in the coming days. Opposition parties, however, have not wasted time making partisan attacks against the government. Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer suggested it was suspicious for the prime minister to be absent from question period Wednesday — a day in which Trudeau usually regularly attends and fields all questions from across the aisle. The subject dominated question period with the opposition claiming the Norman case is an example of a cover-up, a line of attack used frequently in Tory attacks on the SNC-Lavalin affair.<doc-sep>Vice-Admiral Mark Norman said today he's pleased to be "exonerated of any wrongdoing" but is disappointed by the "alarming and protracted bias" in his breach-of-trust case. During a news conference in Ottawa following the announcement that the Public Prosecution Service of Canada would be staying a single breach-of-trust charge against him, Norman said he has no regrets about his conduct. "I am confident that at all times I acted with integrity, I acted ethically and I acted in the best interests of the Royal Canadian Navy, the Canadian Forces and, ultimately, the people of Canada," he said. Norman had been accused of leaking cabinet secrets in relation to a $668-million shipbuilding deal to lease a supply vessel. He was accused of leaking to both an executive at the Davie Shipyard in Levis, Que., which leased a supply ship to the navy, and to a CBC journalist. Norman said he is now looking forward to getting back to work, but is disappointed it took this long. "The alarming and protracted bias of perceived guilt across the senior levels of government has been quite damaging and the emotional and financial impacts of the entire ordeal have taken a toll," he said. Norman said he has an "important story" to tell Canadians, which he will be sharing in the coming days. Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jonathan Vance issued a statement today saying he will be discussing Norman's return to regular duty at the earliest opportunity. "This decision ends court proceedings that have been a long and difficult process for Vice-Admiral Norman, his family and for the Canadian Armed Forces," Vance said in the statement. "We have missed Vice-Admiral Norman a great deal and I look forward to welcoming him back to work as soon as possible." The Crown announced earlier today that it had stayed the charge, adding that new information that had come to light through Norman's defence team convinced the prosecution that there was no longer a reasonable chance of conviction. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced today the federal government would be paying Norman's legal fees. A private crowdsourcing initiative already has raised more than $400,000 for Norman's defence. The prosecution said Norman's actions were inappropriate and secretive, but that doesn't mean a crime was committed. "Inappropriate does not mean criminal," said Barbara Mercier, the lead prosecutor. A breach-of-trust charge can be laid against an appointed or elected official discharging a public duty. To convict, the Crown must prove the accused person's conduct represented a "serious and marked" departure from the standards expected in that position, and that the accused acted outside the public interest towards a dishonest, partial, corrupt or oppressive purpose. Watch: How the Vice-Admiral Mark Norman story unfolded this morning How the Norman trial unfolded Wednesday morning CBC News 0:55 The Public Prosecution Service of Canada dropped their charges against Vice-Admiral Mark Norman. Here's how the morning unfolded around his case. 0:55 Speaking to reporters after the court proceeding, Mercier declined to describe the new information that convinced the prosecution to abandon the case. "This was a very complex case ... I cannot get into the specifics of that information. The defence counsel gave it to us under certain conditions for our purposes only," she said. "But I will say that, absorbing it, comparing it to investigation materials, we came to that conclusion, that there's no probable prospect of conviction." Mercier insisted that there was no political interference in the case. "The Department of Public Prosecutions decided to lay the charge, and they decided today, we decided alone, without political interference whatsoever, that we couldn't make the charge," she said. Asked when he intends to return to work as he left the courthouse, Norman replied, "As soon as I possibly can." 'Bittersweet' outcome His lawyer Marie Henein issued a statement on his behalf, calling the Crown's decision "bittersweet" because the personal cost to Norman and his family from the two-year legal battle can never be repaid. "It has been difficult and demoralizing," the statement reads. "We have resilient institutions in this country and eventually those institutions got to the right result. But let's not forget, that only came after a long and hard fight and at great personal cost to Vice-Admiral Norman." Watch: Vice-Admiral Mark Norman's full press conference with lawyer Marie Henein Vice-Admiral Mark Norman spoke to reporters after charge dropped CBC News 32:41 Vice-Admiral Mark Norman held a news conference with his lawyer Marie Henein after federal prosecutors drop breach of trust charge against him. 32:41 At the news conference, Henein said the outcome of Norman's case should give Canadians confidence that their justice system is "truly unassailable" and that prosecutors act independently. "No person in this country should ever walk into a courtroom and feel like they are fighting their elected government or any sort of political factors at all," she said. The high-profile, politically charged case saw the Liberal government face allegations of political interference from both the Opposition Conservatives and Norman's defence team. The defence had claimed, in both arguments and court filings, that the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office had attempted to orchestrate the prosecution of the case. The defence also alleged that former Treasury Board president Scott Brison tried to kill the lease deal with the Davie shipyard in Levis, Que. on behalf of rival Irving Shipbuilding in his home province of Nova Scotia. The Liberal government, the public prosecution service and Brison have all denied the accusations, which were made in court and in court filings. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh called for an independent investigation of how the case was handled. "What we've seen in this case is some deep concerns around a cosy relationship between the Liberal government and the Irving companies. We've heard concerns around Scott Brison's implication and involvement, and we also heard some allegations of direct political interference of the Prime Minister's Office in the handling of this case," he said. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has called for an independent investigation into the handling of the Mark Norman case. (Darryl Dyck/Canadian Press) Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declined to comment on the case on his way into a Liberal caucus meeting today. "The process involved in a public prosecution like this is entirely independent of my office," he said. "It's an independent process and we have confidence in the work done by the director of public prosecutions." At Norman's pre-trial hearings, his defence team accused the government of blocking access to documents. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer accused Trudeau today of trying to destroy Norman's reputation and career because the vice-admiral "stood up to him." "We still have lots of questions about why the government was so afraid of the truth coming to light, why they withheld documents, why they refused to hand over information that Mark Norman and his lawyer were asking for to help clear his name and shed light on this," he said. Director of Public Prosecutions Kathleen Roussel issued a statement that said the Crown concluded it could not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Norman's conduct in this case amounted to a "serious and marked departure from the standards expected of a person in his position of trust." That decision was based on the evidence, the law and the "principles regarding reasonable prospect of conviction," she said. No political influence "No other factors were considered in this decision, nor was there any contact or influence from outside the PPSC, including political influence in either the initial decision to prosecute Mr. Norman or in the decision to stay the charge today," Roussel said. Andrew Leslie, a retired lieutenant-general who was elected in 2015, announced May 1 he was stepping away from politics after one term as a Liberal MP. It was reported last week that Leslie would be testifying for Norman's defence. When Norman arrived at the Ottawa courthouse Wednesday morning, Leslie was there to greet him. CBC News caught up with Chantier Davie CEO Spencer Fraser outside the courtroom Wednesday. He said there will be an opportunity to speak more about the case as it "gets more explored."<doc-sep>
Share this Story: Christie Blatchford: The state is a powerful foe, and it almost crushed Mark Norman Christie Blatchford: The state is a powerful foe, and it almost crushed Mark Norman As Norman’s lawyer Marie Henein said Wednesday: 'No person should walk into a courtroom fighting their elected government or any sort of political factors' Photo by Errol McGihon/Postmedia Article content Most days, there were a half-dozen, often more, lawyers from the Department of Justice arrayed behind Vice-Admiral Mark Norman, a physical reminder that what he was up against was the state, with its massive reach and awesome power. The DOJ lawyers couldn’t begin to fit at the counsel tables, but spilled out onto the hard public benches. We apologize, but this video has failed to load. tap here to see other videos from our team. Try refreshing your browser, or Christie Blatchford: The state is a powerful foe, and it almost crushed Mark Norman Back to video Thus what Norman’s lead defence lawyer, Marie Henein, said at a press conference Wednesday after the Public Prosecution Service of Canada stayed the lone charge against her client: “No person should walk into a courtroom fighting their elected government or any sort of political factors.” Yet that’s precisely what the 55-year-old Norman, until his suspension in January of 2017 the No. 2 man in the entire Canadian Forces, faced. The PPSC and the Director of Public Prosecutions Kathleen Roussel, Henein said both in and outside court, did their job. In late March, the defence team handed over its entire case — the fruits of months of defence investigation and witness interviews, some of whom neither the RCMP nor Crown lawyers had deigned to question — to prosecutors Barbara Mercier and John MacFarlane, who were open-minded enough to review and test what they saw. Article content https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZZBRjgqS78&=&feature=youtu.be This is what prosecutors are supposed to do. They have a higher duty than ordinary lawyers, and it’s to fairness and truth, and it’s an ongoing duty. Their inescapable conclusion? They had no reasonable prospect of convicting Norman of breach of trust, which is the prosecutors’ test across the country for instigating or continuing a prosecution. As Henein told Ontario Court Judge Heather Perkins-McVey, “In court, it is routine that we say that the prosecution has acted in the finest traditions of the bar but I think at this juncture in the political life of this country, it is important to point out exactly what that means. “The tradition, a tradition that is so jealously guarded and protected by those who understand the value of a constitutional democracy … is a tradition of prosecutorial independence.” Article content Later at the press conference, lest there be any doubt what she meant, Henein introduced her all-female defence team with a shot across the bow. “Fortunately,” she said with a nod to her client, “Vice-Admiral Norman didn’t fire the females he hired.” Photo by Errol McGihon/Postmedia This of course was an unmistakable reference to the deposed attorney-general Jody Wilson-Raybould and former Treasury Board president Jane Philpott, each of whom fought in different ways to protect the independence of the PPSC and the DPP in the SNC-Lavalin imbroglio. They paid the price for it, too, when Prime Minister Justin Trudeau booted them from caucus. The happy result Wednesday, Henein said unequivocally, happened “Despite, not because of, the government.” Article content The government, in its various arms including the Prime Minister’s Office, the Privy Council Office, the Department of National Defence and Treasury Board, so collectively dragged its feet and stalled on disclosing key documents that the defence was forced to bring what’s called a third-party records application. “We brought that application for a reason,” Henein said. “None of that (information) came willingly.” Thousands of documents remain outstanding. First, the government asserted cabinet confidence over all documents having to do with the Norman case, refusing repeated defence requests to waive it. Then, two weeks after Henein filed the third-party records application, the government did an about-face, abruptly claiming what’s called public interest privilege.