Skip to main content

Politics Brian Mulroney memoirs contradict Wilson-Raybould testimony, Kim Campbell on politics and attorney-general

Former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney arrives to speak at a conference in Ottawa on March 5, 2019.

Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press

Jody Wilson-Raybould approvingly points to Brian Mulroney as a prime minister who knew better than to politically interfere with the judgment of his attorney-general when it comes to criminal prosecutions.

But the former justice minister evidently didn’t read Mr. Mulroney’s memoirs, in which the former Conservative leader proudly recounts how he ordered his attorney-general to refer a controversial murder case to the Supreme Court of Canada.

That attorney-general was Kim Campbell who, according to Mr. Mulroney, did as she was told in the case of David Milgaard, who was wrongfully imprisoned for 23 years for a murder he did not commit. She went on to become prime minister.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Mulroney’s memoirs flatly contradict the version of events cited by Ms. Campbell in her own memoirs and repeated by Ms. Wilson-Raybould in a written submission last week to the House of Commons justice committee. The submission was intended to bolster her contention that she faced inappropriate pressure last fall from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, his top aides and others to stop the criminal prosecution of Montreal engineering giant SNC-Lavalin.

As part of her submission, Ms. Wilson-Raybould included transcripts of text messages she exchanged with her chief of staff, Jessica Prince, following a Dec. 18 meeting with Mr. Trudeau’s chief of staff, Katie Telford, and principal secretary Gerald Butts.

Ms. Prince relates that the duo tried to persuade her that Ms. Wilson-Raybould should seek advice from a retired Supreme Court justice as to whether she could review a decision by the director of public prosecutions, who had refused to negotiate a remediation agreement with SNC-Lavalin rather than pursue prosecution on bribery charges related to contracts in Libya. Ms. Prince says she repeatedly told Ms. Telford and Mr. Butts that would amount to “interference.”

In the course of that discussion, Ms. Prince says Mr. Butts raised the Milgaard case.

“Gerry told some story about how Mulroney met with David Milgaard’s mom, walked into the [cabinet] room and told Kim Campbell she had to fix it. She gave him all these A-G reasons why she couldn’t interfere but then she ultimately did what Mulroney wanted and was right,” Ms. Prince said.

After asking for more details about the reference to Mr. Milgaard, Ms. Wilson-Raybould then asks Ms. Prince to send her Ms. Campbell’s cell phone number, commenting “Good grief – this is absurd.”

Ms. Wilson-Raybould met with Ms. Campbell the following day at a Vancouver coffee shop.

Story continues below advertisement

“Needless to say, she categorically denied what Mr. Butts had said and was quite offended and outraged by the comments. She adamantly denied the characterization not only of her as the attorney-general but of her former boss, Prime Minister Mulroney,” Ms. Wilson-Raybould wrote in her submission.

“She further reflected – as she did in her memoirs (1996) – that Brian Mulroney ‘was much too good a lawyer to intervene improperly in the matter. He never breathed a word about the Milgaard case to his A-G, nor did anyone in his office ever attempt to influence her handling of the case.’”

Ms. Wilson-Raybould did not mention that Ms. Campbell also wrote in her memoirs that Mr. Mulroney had “blindsided” her by meeting with Mr. Milgaard’s mother, Joyce, in 1991. She wrote that she was assured the two discussed only Mr. Milgaard’s living conditions in prison and not his application for a review of his conviction for the 1969 rape and murder of a Saskatoon nursing student, which Ms. Campbell had rejected.

Nevertheless, Ms. Campbell termed it an “inappropriate intervention” and suggested it was politically motivated. She wrote that Mr. Mulroney’s chief of staff, Hugh Segal, told the British Columbia Conservative caucus that the prime minister’s meeting with Joyce Milgaard was “brilliant” and the kind of thing he needed to do more to burnish his image in the run-up to the 1993 election.

Nor did Ms. Wilson-Raybould mention, or appear aware of the fact, that Mr. Mulroney completely contradicted Ms. Campbell’s version of events in his own memoirs, published in 2007.

He recounted how he was “disturbed” by the way in which Ms. Campbell had “brushed off” Joyce Milgaard, having told her during a public encounter: “Madam, if you wish to have your son’s case dealt with fairly, please do not approach me.” He was “privately furious with her” for rejecting Mr. Milgaard’s application for a review of his case.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Mulroney provided a condensed transcript of his meeting in Winnipeg with Joyce Milgaard, during which he said he was “extremely prudent” in his choice of words because he knew they were being recorded. At one point, he told her that Ms. Campbell is going to look at “new information that’s come in” and that he’s going to be talking to her when he gets back to Ottawa about her son’s case.

When he got back, Mr. Mulroney wrote, he had Ms. Campbell summoned to his parliamentary office where, “because of the sensitivity of the matter, I met with her alone.”

“‘The matter has been reviewed by the department and I have conveyed our decision,’ she told me.

“‘Kim,’ I answered, ‘that is not acceptable to me. The law provides for a reference to the Supreme Court and it is my intention to ensure that this case is in fact referred to the Supreme Court.’

“My tone was firm and my words unequivocal. She understood and changed her tack quickly.

“‘Prime Minister,’ she answered, ‘If this is the case, may I make the announcement myself?’”

Story continues below advertisement

The top court ultimately recommended Mr. Milgaard’s conviction be set aside. Ms. Campbell ordered a new trial but the government of Saskatchewan refused to do so, issued a stay of proceedings and freed Mr. Milgaard in 1992. Five years later, DNA evidence from the victim’s clothes cleared Mr. Milgaard and led to the arrest and eventual conviction of serial rapist Larry Fisher.

In a series of posts on Sunday on Twitter, Ms. Campbell insisted Mr. Mulroney’s version of events is not true and defended her handling of the case.

“I didn’t read Mr. Mulroney’s memoirs. Guess I should have!” she tweeted.

“While Mr. Mulroney apparently insists he did something he didn’t in the Milgaard case, I should point out that this was not a prosecutorial decision but an application for the Royal Prerogative of Mercy (And I actually did get advice from a retired SCC justice).”

Mr. Butts and the top public servant, Michael Wernick, have testified that no improper pressure was exerted on Ms. Wilson-Raybould over the SNC-Lavalin case. They have maintained they only wanted her to get a second opinion on the advisability of overriding the public prosecutor’s decision, as allowed by law.

Ms. Wilson-Raybould’s written submission, released on Friday, supplements her nearly four hours of oral testimony last month. She believes she was moved out of her dual role as justice minister and attorney-general to veterans affairs in a mid-January cabinet shuffle as punishment for refusing to intervene in the SNC-Lavalin case. She resigned from cabinet a month later.

Story continues below advertisement

Report an error
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter