B.C. man who got $8M says he'll be penniless if made to pay sex assault damages
VANCOUVER – A B.C. man who was awarded $8 million after being wrongfully convicted of sexual assault and spending 27 years in prison says he'll be left 'homeless and penniless' if forced to pay civil damages to victims who won a lawsuit against him.
The B.C. Court of Appeal ruled this week that five victims who were awarded $375,000 each in January against Ivan Henry can't go after his home or vehicle pending his appeal, but ordered him to pay $232,000 into a trust account.
The ruling says Henry received a multimillion-dollar payout in 2018 for breaches of his Charter rights after suing the province and others for wrongful conviction, but five complainants sued him in 2017 for sexual assaults they say he committed.
The B.C. Supreme Court sided with the women but the ruling says Henry has not taken any steps to pay them and both he and the plaintiffs have filed appeals.
The ruling says Henry applied to 'stay execution' of the damages award and told the court he spent millions defending the lawsuit, gave away more than $2 million, and now lives in a mortgage-free home on a monthly stipend from old-age security and the Canada Pension Plan.
The Court of Appeal found discrepancies in Henry's claims, finding his evidence leaves $1.8 million 'unaccounted for,' while he couldn't explain where 'large sums' flowing in and out of his account went between 2018 and 2023.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 30, 2025.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vancouver Sun
4 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
B.C. federal inmate's proposed class-action over COVID lockdowns certified by judge
A proposed class-action lawsuit filed against the federal government for confining prison inmates in their cells for 20 hours a day during the COVID-19 pandemic has been certified by a B.C. Supreme Court judge. Representative plaintiff Dean Christopher Roberts alleges medical isolation in the country's prisons beginning in March 2020 meant a large number of prisoners were subjected to 'inhumane rights restrictions,' a form of lockdown that amounted to solitary confinement, according to the judgment. The prisoners were 'confined to their cells for up to 22 hours a day and denied any meaningful human interaction for an extended period of time,' wrote Justice Michael Tammen. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The lawsuit would include anyone imprisoned in a Correctional Services of Canada prison during a declared COVID-19 outbreak at the institution after March 11, 2020, it said. To be eligible, they will have had to have been confined to their cells for 20 or more hours a day and deprived of the opportunity to interact with others for less than two hours a day for 15 or more consecutive days, it said. The lawsuit alleges negligence and breaches of Charter-protected rights guaranteed by sections 7 and 12 of the Charter, which protect life, liberty and security of person, and ban cruel and unusual punishment. Other court decisions have recognized solitary confinement causes harm, that administrative segregation is a form of solitary confinement, that solitary confinement is the practice of confining an prisoner in a cell for 22 hours a day and failing to provide daily meaningful contact with other people, the judge said, citing the plaintiffs' arguments. The plaintiff cited a number of cases from Ontario and B.C. in 2020 and 2021 that relied on similar allegations of negligence and Charter breaches. The federal attorney general opposed certification, arguing administrative segregation for medical reasons is 'something entirely different' from solitary confinement, because it's 'both medically necessary and informed by medical advice,' according to Tammen's decision. Administrative segregation allows prisons to isolate an prisoner to ensure the safety of staff, visitors and inmates and to maintain security of the prisons and it is not a punishment or sanction, according to the Correctional Service website. It also said the proposed lawsuit is overly broad and lacks clarity, and Roberts is not a suitable representative plaintiff. But Tammen ruled the lawsuit could proceed. He said the federal government raised several points that could cause the lawsuit to fail at trial, including its argument that medical isolation is different from other forms of separate confinement. He said a trial judge may decide the prisons' response to the 'unprecedented and unexpected' pandemic and the type of isolation it implemented was medically necessary, and the lawsuit would fail. But he said that has to be decided at trial, 'not at this preliminary stage.' At the beginning of the COVID outbreak, Roberts was imprisoned at the Mission Institution, a medium-security prison. From April 2 to 7, 2020, the prison was in a lockdown and inmates were confined to cells around the clock. When Roberts returned from Mission hospital on April 11, 2020, where he was treated for five days for COVID, he said inmates were only let out of their cells for 20 minutes a day to shower, to use the phone and to have their cells cleaned, according to the decision. And even though Mission prison was declared COVID free by mid-May 2020, significant restrictions with limited time allowed out of cells continued until mid-July 2020, it said. Tammen said there is a 'considerable body of evidence about periods of medical isolation for non-symptomatic inmates at various institutions' over three years, with many saying they were confined to their cell for up to 23 hours a day with no meaningful social interaction and limited time for showering or phone calls. The federal government does not dispute this but said the prolonged periods of isolation were medically mandated. It said punitive damages aren't warranted but the judge said the notice of claim includes details that could support punitive damages because courts have condemned the practice of subjecting inmates to prolonged periods of separate confinement. None of the allegations have been proven in court. The inmates' first lawsuit was filed in 2020 and was amended several times until it was moved to the certification phase in October 2024. Roberts was sentenced to a life imprisonment after being convicted by a jury in 1995 for the 1994 strangling of his wife and one twin 14-month-old son, the smothering of the other twin, and for attempting to kill his adopted three-year-old, who was left asleep in the burning house before being rescued and surviving. He always maintained his innocence, claiming he was the victim of the then-new controversial RCMP investigative undercover sting technique called Mr. Big. In 2021, he was granted the right to ask for ministerial review of his case to seek updated DNA testing he said was needed to prove his innocence.
Vancouver Sun
4 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
B.C. RCMP undercover officer posing as postal employee breached rights of accused
A judge has ruled that Kelowna RCMP violated an accused's Charter rights by sending an undercover officer posing as a Canada Post carrier to deliver a package rigged with an alarm and a dye pack during a weapons investigation. Police devised a plan to deliver the package to Thomas Troy Dill after Canadian border officers in Vancouver alerted Mounties in 2022 to a shipment from China containing two silencers, which are illegal in Canada. Minutes after the package was delivered, Dill opened it, triggering the alarm, and waiting police armed with a warrant entered his apartment. He was later arrested and charged with smuggling firearms and drug possession. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. Dill's lawyer alleged his Charter rights were breached and a four-day hearing was held in B.C. Supreme Court in Kelowna in April and May to determine whether the evidence was admissible, according to a judgment released on Monday. Justice Edlyn Laurie ruled the delivery of the package constituted an illegal search, even though Dill invited the officer posing as a mail courier into the building. She ruled police overstepped their authority because the general warrant 'did not authorize the controlled delivery of the package by the (undercover agent) to Mr. Dill.' The officer who sought the warrant, identified only as Const. Riley, testified he included that an undercover officer would pose as a postal carrier, but he wasn't aware of details of how that would be done. He said he didn't believe the delivery constituted a search. Dill's lawyer argued it was a search because the undercover officer's purpose in being at the door was to gather evidence, according to Laurie's decision. The Charter protected Dill in his suite but 'the point of contention here … is whether Mr. Dill had a reasonable expectation of privacy in observations made of him and in his interactions with the (undercover officer) at the doorway of the unit. In my view, he did,' wrote Laurie. Dill's privacy interest wasn't 'extinguished simply because he opened the door,' she wrote. 'Courts have found that Section 8 of the Charter protects individuals from unauthorized police surveillance inside residential buildings where it interferes with the person's reasonable expectation of privacy,' she wrote. The prosecutor said the warrant was accompanied by an 'assistance order' that directed Canada Post to provide assistance to the RCMP and that 'implicitly the controlled delivery was judicially authorized,' the decision said. Laurie didn't agree, ruling the assistance order didn't authorize the controlled delivery. Dill's lawyer also argued police had illegally searched Dill's apartment when they entered to retrieve the rigged parcel but also searched the rest of the suite while they were inside. The general warrant had authorized police to replace the contents of the package, install an alarm and a dye pack, and to enter his apartment as soon as the alarm had been activated. The officers had permission to enter the apartment only to retrieve the package and its contents, Dill's lawyer argued, but the prosecution said the warrant didn't specify how the premises were to be searched and the search was therefore 'Charter-compliant.' The judge ruled with the prosecution on that search and on a third Charter breach allegation that Dill's right to counsel was delayed because he wasn't allowed to speak to a lawyer for one hour and 18 minutes after his arrest. Const. Shawn Murphy, who entered Dill's apartment after the alarm was triggered, said he was looking for the package as he went down a hallway toward the bathroom, bedroom and closet, and saw a handgun sticking out from under clothes and a long gun in a duffel bag on the floor. He also saw some Ziploc bags on the bathroom floor and one in the toilet as well as methamphetamine residue on the toilet seat. The existence of those items was then used to apply for a search warrant for drugs and weapons, according to the decision. Murphy testified even though a police emergency response team had checked the apartment, he wasn't certain there weren't animals or booby traps in the suite, and as he moved through the apartment, he was always looking for the package. He said he later saw the empty package in the kitchen and a silencer on a recliner in the living room. The judge accepted the testimony of that timeline in rejecting the defence challenge. Although Murphy was questioned at length about how he could have missed the packaging and the silencer, 'it was never put to him that he had improper motives in searching the unit,' said Laurie. slazaruk@
CTV News
16 hours ago
- CTV News
North Vancouver teacher's 9 convictions for sex crimes against young boys survive Charter challenge
Dennis Cooper is seen in a 1977 class photo with his Grade 6 teacher Brian Moore. Cooper is one of two victims of Moore who successfully had the publication ban on their identities lifted. (Dennis Cooper) An 85-year-old former teacher has lost his bid to have nine convictions for historical sex crimes against young boys thrown out. In a decision issued last week, Judge Robert Hamilton dismissed various legal arguments from Brian Melicke Moore about why delays in the case should result in a stay of proceedings. Moore was convicted in North Vancouver provincial court earlier this year of eight counts of indecent assault and one count of touching for a sexual purpose. He was acquitted of three other counts of indecent assault. All of the indecent assault convictions stem from conduct that occurred between 1976 and 1982, while Moore was a Grade 6 teacher in North Vancouver. The other conviction relates to an incident involving the child of a good friend at Moore's home between 2005 and 2007. Moore's sentencing hearing in the case is scheduled for July, according to Hamilton's decision. While allegations against Moore first came to the attention of police in 1988, the decision indicates he was told by investigators and Crown prosecutors at the time that 'they would not pursue charges against him unless more information came forward.' In applications to the court, Moore argued that there had been a 34-year delay in bringing the charges against him, breaching his rights under Sections 7 and 11 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. He also argued that proceeding with the prosecution after such a delay was an abuse of process by the Crown, and that an additional delay between his arrest in August 2022 and the laying of charges in February 2023 was also a Charter violation. The 34-year delay Hamilton rejected the premise of Moore's first argument, writing in his decision that 'there was no 34-year delay' in bringing charges against the teacher. Rather, the judge determined that the case was essentially 'dormant' until new information was brought to police in 2022. 'The Crown told Mr. Moore in 1988 that no charges would be laid, absent more information,' the decision reads. 'It took 34 years for that additional information to come to the attention of the police and Crown and over the course of one year, June 2022 to June 2023, the police interviewed the complainants in this case, forwarded that information to the Crown, and the Crown approved the charges that came before me at trial.' Moore argued that the threat of charges had loomed over him since 1988, though Hamilton noted that the teacher had provided no evidence of the physical or psychological toll that this knowledge had taken on him. Indeed, the judge added, if such a toll existed because Moore knew that there was other information about his crimes that could come to light and cause charges to be laid, that would not be the Crown's fault. 'I would characterize the stress and psychological/physical toll that Mr. Moore has been under since 1988 as being self-inflicted, but nothing to be laid at the feet of the police or Crown,' the decision reads. Abuse of process On the question of abuse of process, Hamilton noted that he had dismissed a previous application from Moore that sought to stay the proceedings for the same reason. 'In my view, nothing has changed from the facts advanced in support of the earlier abuse of process allegation and now at the end of the trial,' the judge's decision reads. It notes that the legal concept of abuse of process involves a two-stage test. First, the court must consider whether the conduct of the prosecution has affected the accused's right to a fair trial, something Moore conceded had not happened in his case. Second, the court must consider whether the prosecution's conduct undermines the integrity of the justice system. Hamilton found no such issue, noting that the Crown did had honoured its 1988 statement to Moore that he would not be charged unless new information came forward, and finding that the Crown did 'exactly what the public would expect' once such information was revealed. Pursuing the case based on new information after 34 years did not undermine the integrity of the justice system, the judge concluded. 'In my view, the opposite proposition is accurate, that being that if the Crown did not prosecute these allegations against Mr. Moore, that failure to prosecute would undermine the integrity of the judicial system,' the decision reads. 'The evidence in this case against Mr. Moore was overwhelming. Failing to bring justice to Mr. Moore's victims would shake the confidence of the public in our justice system. This prosecution needed to happen.' The undertaking deadline Finally, Moore argued that his Charter rights were violated when the Crown failed to charge him in a timely manner after his arrest. According to the decision, the teacher was arrested on Aug. 4, 2022, and released on a police undertaking that imposed various conditions on him and set a first court appearance for Dec. 7 of that year. However, the charges against Moore were not laid until Feb. 15, 2023, which was well after the court date set in the undertaking. 'Mr. Moore says that because of the failure by the Crown to approve charges by Dec. 7, 2022, there should be a stay of proceedings in this case,' the decision reads. Hamilton disagreed with this proposition, noting that police set the Dec. 7 first appearance date without input from prosecutors. 'To enter a stay of proceedings because the Crown had not yet reached a conclusion about whether to approve charges in a case dating back to between 1976 and 2005, involving 12 complainants, on or before a date the police selected without any Crown input, in my view, would not only bring the administration of justice into disrepute, such a decision would serve (as) an injustice to the complainants that no informed member of society would endorse,' the decision reads.
