Williamson: Panel has reached unanimous conclusion. There are 19 issues, some duplicative, some reflecting amendments. Yes signifies the issue has been proved. A no means there has been a failure to prove.
1. Extra-judicial statements– Yes
2. Should he have known these would be disseminated–Yes
3. Should he have known these would have likelihood of prejudicing a proceeding?–Yes
4. Did these statements have likelihood of heightening public condemnation–Yes
5. By making these statements to the media did he engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit?–No
Williamson give explanation. Said if they didn’t claim that for him saying they weren’t cooperating, hard to find that for his condom comments.
6.a,b and c: Did he by not providing complete DNA report fail to make timely disclosure?–Yes, yes, yes.
7.a,b and c:Did he fail to give full disclosure by memorializing meetings?–Yes. No.
8.a,b. Yes. Yes.
9.a.b. Yes. Yes.
10.a.b. By instructing Meehan to make a report of only positive matches violate rules>–Yes. No.
11.a.b. Did he make false representations to a tribunal?–Yes. Yes.
12.a.b. By telling opposing council he’d given them everything did he misrepresent?–Yes. Yes.
13.a.b. Yes. Yes.
14.a.b. Yes. Yes.
15.a.b. Yes. Yes.
16.a.b. Re statements to Grievance Committee. No. No.
17.a.b. Re statements to Grievance Committee. Yes. Yes.
18.a.b. Re statements to Grievance Committee. Yes. Yes.
Williamson: Notes the last three involving misrepresentation to the committee, we have some concerns that those charges not warranted because it’s rare people are charged with making false statements to the grievance committee and if they are charged with that it may have a chilling effect on people making full disclosures in the future. May be an instance of over-charging.
19.a. Yes.
Williamson: At conclusion of Phase 2 will provide reasoning for these findings.
