With the first portion of Trial held on March 7– 11, 2024, much evidence via testimonies has come forward to test the credibility of Cathy Bennett and her co-conspirators. The photo is a portion of Cathy’s Trial Affidavit sworn to and filed with the Court on August 27, 2024, that was also submitted by her lawyer, Jennifer Reid within the EXHIBIT BOOK OF THE RESPONDENT CATHY BENNETT, VOLUME 9 OF 10. At #80, Ms. Bennett lies about what Constable Clarke told her!
When I questioned Constable Clarke on the stand, I presented him first with a copy of the UNDERTAKING he had drafted on the night Cathy falsely accused me of abuse and threats. He acknowledged that he had never forced me out of my home and that as stated in the UNDERTAKING, I was allowed to remain in the home as Cathy Bennett stated that she was staying in the boathouse. I then presented Constable Clarke with Cathy’s Affidavit at section #80, to which he stated, “I would not have said that”, and he further elaborated that it was the responsibility of Victim Services to provide Cathy with the UNDERTAKING. Evidence has come forward proving that Victim’s Service did explain to Cathy and did provide her with the UNDERTAKING shortly after she had given statements to the RCMP on January 2-3, 2021.
The question then is “WHY DID CATHY LIE IN HER AFFIDAVIT”? At this point, it’s obvious that Cathy needs to cover her tracks for having discredited me to our friends and community (some friends/community members were at trial to support Cathy, believing her lies). The lie gave Cathy opportunity to make it appear that Constable Clarke had solid evidence and so enabling them to make the move she states in her affidavit, when the truth is that all they had was hearsay from herself, Barbara Sawatsky and Christine Scott. Keep in mind, that Cathy and I had not hung around Barb and Christine for the past 10 years due to their underhanded dealings that three witnesses can testify to, but given our system in the Civil Courts, I have to wait until AFTER trial to bring these witnesses in on REBUTTAL. My understanding of rebuttal evidence, is that the truth may come out via other testimonies as trial commences and so much time and money will be saved in the end if Rebuttal witnesses are no longer needed,… and of course, Cathy Bennett may decide it best to finally make a fair offer to settle. This may save the court time and money, but at the expense of victims.
I have recently lodged a complaint with the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission for the RCMP / Government of Canada (ref #: R2025-000403). Although this complaint focusses mainly on the false information provided by Constable Clarke while on the stand, and as to why he didn’t conduct a proper and full investigation (after I had given up my rights to silence on January 2, 2021), it also involves the false information provided by Ms. Bennett. I am hoping that my complaint will bring about a thorough investigation. It has bothered me for quite some time that Cathy’s niece is married to Constable Brad Murray who is also with the Tantallon RCMP— is it possible that Constable Clarke had been unduly influenced? This would not be the first time that Confirmation Bias has affected RCMP Reporting.
As to witness Barbara Sawatski, who jumped on the bandwagon with Cathy to falsely accuse me of abuse, I was able to have her acknowledge that she was fired from her position as Hatchet Lake Fire Chief based on “male” Fire Fighter complaints made to the Human Rights Commission. I was able to locate two articles, one from the CBC and the other from CTV, that report Barb as stating in one that she was terminated as fire chief due to a single report to the Human Rights Commission and then in the other she states that it had been complaints made by several male firefighters. At first Barb stated on the stand to the effect that all the women firefighters left in support of her, but then as I continued to question her, she then revealed that there was around 15 women at the Hatchet Lake Fire Department at the time, but as I questioned her more specifically as to whether all 15 walked off in support of her, Barb then revealed that only two women had left… and maybe a third (she was confused with her name— Melinda?)… oh and by the way, the two women who left the fire department in support of Barb, was her partner Christine Scott and Cathy Bennett. I was there when Barb told Cathy and I that she had been fired, she did not say that it was based on Human Rights complaints!
So you ask, why would Cathy, Barb and Christine lie against me in court? Money for one! Just recently a case was heard where a husband had abused his wife and a new Tort of Family Violence enacted by the presiding Judge enable a penalty of $150,000.00 against the husband. Keep in mind that a civil court judge does not have the same strict guidelines that a criminal judge has,… they don’t need 99% proof, they only need to be 50% sure that abuse could have happened, and that is why Cathy, Barb and Christine have conspired, and that is what I need to bring forward in order sway the judge to what really happened. Oh and Judges can and are allowed to be biased, just google Justice Sparks (now in this Judge’s case however, I agree with her bias being allowed— as a black judge she chose to show leniency to young black offenders in order to help balance the scales of justice where rampant systemic racism meant that young black offenders were dealt with more harshly than young white offenders ).
**Note Cathy is also not truthful at #84, #85 and other portions of her Affidavit, however #80 is far more relevant for me to bring forward.