Public Safety Committee on Nov. 19th, 2014

[Sue O'Sullivan]

There are two. There's the humanitarian where you're well aware a family member may provide DNA. It's a choice they make. That's why I'm trying to highlight how important it is. These are complex issues to explain. If I'm a family member and I'm providing it for humanitarian reasons, I would like you to tell me in simple language how my DNA is going to be used. How long are you going to keep it? If I change my mind a year later, how do I say I don't want my DNA in there any more? They have put processes in place for this. I'm just emphasizing how important it is that when this rolls out, we set expectations for victims as well.

For example, this is not the first thing, that we all check the DNA databases. The legislation is designed for when they've exhausted other investigative means. But you want to set that expectation. I think all Canadians, as does everyone else, watch TV and have a lot of misconceptions about what it is. I think Judy alluded to that too in some of her comments. We need to set the expectation in plain language to be able to explain to victims in a consistent way across this country, if you're in the humanitarian, you're volunteering.

You're quite right. I have heard from different victims that perhaps some family members may not want their DNA there. Again, it comes down to, if I'm going to provide it, and I understand why I would provide it, how would it be used? Also, if I change my mind, I can voluntarily have that removed from the database.

On the police side, and again this is more the police, but my understanding is if there's a victims index, for example, one thing I hear from every victim I talk to is that they don't want what happened to them or their family to happen to anyone else. For example, if I'm a victim of sexual assault and an item is taken from me, and there's an opportunity for me—it's my choice—to provide my DNA, should that item show up at another crime scene, as was indicated in the first panel, which could potentially identify a serial predator or aid another investigation, I want to know that if I make that choice if that means I'm going to have to testify if somebody's caught, or something else. I want to know that information. It's really important, and I am emphasizing this because as we roll this out, it's like anything else: I can only make a choice if I have the information I need to make that informed decision.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much, Ms. O'Sullivan. Our time is over on that now.

We will go to Mr. Falk, please.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I want to thank both our witnesses for attending today.

Ms. Peterson, I want to extend my condolences to you on the loss of your daughter, Lindsey. As a parent, I can't imagine what losing a child would be like, let alone not knowing what happened.

[Judy Peterson]

Thank you.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I was present as well when the late Jim Flaherty mentioned you in the House when he introduced his budget earlier this year, as being the champion of bringing this change into legislation, which we're working on today. I'm wondering a couple of things, and I know you talked a little about it. At what point would you have availed yourself of this service had it been available? How do you see this helping families who will experience the same tragedy that you've had to go through?

[Judy Peterson]

I think it took me about five years, and then when the case went cold, I felt that was the next step. When I say I was horrified, that I couldn't do it, it took so much emotional energy to make that decision and put out the request, and then to find out what if she has been sitting there for a year or two and I didn't know.

I think it's one more step. As Sue mentioned, it's a tool. At the point we're at now...I described what's been done on the file, and we've also had an undercover operation. It's been pretty extensive and I feel the only way we're going to find her now is through DNA. She's been gone long enough that lots of the people who lived in that neighbourhood are gone or have forgotten or have moved. I think all families get to a point where they feel this is one thing, just in case. They're probably going to think it's never going to happen, but this is a safeguard for them and their loved ones, just in case.

It's devastating phoning around to find the dentist she went to four years ago to try to get the dental records, and trying to explain why you need them, and getting copies, and trying to ship them off somewhere, and then wondering if when comparing the records to the skull they found there were enough teeth to be able to identify. DNA is the only way I am going to feel that we have found her. I can't speak for all families, but that's the way I feel.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

If this law had been in place, the ability to provide DNA for your daughter, and you had used it, and it hadn't netted a positive identification, how would that have affected you?

[Judy Peterson]

I don't want to give the impression that I feel once her DNA is in the National DNA Data Bank that we're going to find her remains, because I don't. The coroner in British Columbia has been doing this for years, and he has profiled all his unidentified remains. I think I was one of the first people or the first to offer my DNA to compare against his profile, so I know her human remains have not been found in British Columbia.

I don't know if she's in the B.C. crime scene index, but statistics show that if somebody is abducted, usually their remains are found within five kilometres of where they were last seen. So statistics would say she's likely in British Columbia, but who knows? Maybe she hitchhiked and somebody took her to Alberta or Saskatchewan or Ontario. I don't feel as if the minute this is going to get turned on I'm going to find her. I want to know that if I were to get sick and die next week, and if she gets found, somebody would be able to know and give her a proper service.

That's another aspect.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Ms. Peterson, I thank you for your testimony.

Like Mr. Norlock, I want to thank you for your tenacity, and I think you have done your daughter proud.

[Judy Peterson]

Thank you very much.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

I think you have done more than any parent would have done, and I commend you for that.

Ms. O'Sullivan, I'd like to direct a few questions to you.

My predecessor was the Honourable Vic Toews, and he championed the victim bills of rights. I think he would be pleased to see another step whereby victims, and not the perpetrators are the centre of our justice again. Would you agree that this bill will do that?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

We've all been waiting for this implementation, for this bill to come forward. As was pointed out earlier, this was originally contemplated in 2000, and I think it's about time we got to where we are now. If we can help moms and families like Judy's make that connection, at least if their loved ones' remains are out there, then we can be assured that the needs of victims are being met.

[Ted Falk, Conservative, Provencher, MB]

Would you like to add anything else?

[Sue O'Sullivan]

Again, I thank you for the opportunity to present to the committee. I think this is important to implement, and it's going to be that one piece, the tool in the tool kit, for families who have exhausted all other means to be able to make that connection and know whether or not their loved ones are there.

I think it's so important, and I think Ms. Peterson said it so eloquently, just by providing this committee and listening to her experience. Again, I thank Ms. Peterson, all the families, who have pushed to make sure that we have the tools in place to be able to support families, and you've heard me say this, to ensure that victims within our system are informed, considered, and supported.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Thank you very much.

We will go to Mr. Easter, please.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Welcome to Ms. O'Sullivan, and a special welcome to Judy.

I think the finish line is in sight, but I did think that once before—

[Judy Peterson]

You did.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

—in 2003, when we had the RCMP with the database in place. So here we are five Parliaments later.

For you, it's had to be years of hope and despair, and very trying many times. While we're not quite there yet, I think I can honestly say that, having talked to you several times over the years, thinking it was in place in 2003, if it wasn't for your personal effort, we wouldn't be here today. I don't think there's any question about that.

Yes, while many will talk about how important this is for finding issues related to criminal investigations, I think the other side is as important as well. That's the human side of knowing what happened, or maybe not even knowing what happened but knowing your loved one is not out there somewhere in the wilderness, even if they've passed away.

Maybe you could talk a little bit about that side, because I do think that for parents of missing children, how having lost someone impacts their lives, that knowing what happened, or knowing they're dead if that is the case, is as important as the crime side.

I wonder if you have anything to say on that.

[Judy Peterson]

Well, I can give you some examples. I mean, I have already alluded to what if she's out there? I feel like she's waiting for me to find her. You know, I feel that once in a while.

My biggest fear is that all of a sudden I realize what if I never know what happened to her? I sort of went through the first few months, the first year, and then, holy, I can't believe it's been this long, and how did I ever survive? Then all of a sudden it hits me. What if I never know? That's my biggest fear.

In the meantime, you're living this life. You go to work. Most people at work don't know, and they'll ask how many kids I have. How do I answer that question? Most often I say two, because that's how many I have. I have some funny stories about some incidents about that. My younger daughter, if we moved and she'd go out with friends and they would question her, it would be awkward. You feel like you don't want to tell people, not because you don't want to tell them, but because they'll be so shocked they don't know what to say.

One of the members said here today, “I can't even imagine.” I can't tell you how many times I've heard that. In fact, when people question me further and I finally tell them, they look at me, and I can see them trying to envision it of their own children or their own family, and they physically shake their head and say, “I can't even imagine.” They can't even think about it for more than 10 seconds.

That's my experience. Knowing has got to be better than this, that's for sure.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Thank you for that.

I hope we are near the finish line and things happen. I hope you can celebrate the day it goes to be signed off by the Governor General, and I hope that day comes pretty soon.

[Judy Peterson]

I'll be there.

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Good.

I would say to the government, while I'm never happy about having this kind of legislation in a budget bill, I'm satisfied that at least the legislation is there, and I would congratulate the government for that.

My other questions, Mr. Chair, were mainly for RCMP officials. I don't know if anyone can answer this one, because I do think it is.... I had several questions for the RCMP. They're not here any longer.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

Excuse me, Mr. Easter. I'll just interrupt for a second.

We still have RCMP here from the first hour. At the will of the committee, they could be called up—

[Wayne Easter, Liberal, Malpeque, PE]

Okay, if that's possible.

[The Chair, Conservative, Daryl Kramp]

—to answer any questions, if you so desire.