Scanned copy, if there are errors, please e-mail me with corrections:
Opening comments: More at the end.
The Mississauga News - Wednesday, August 27, 2003 - By LOUIE ROSELLA Staff Gyles to stand trial — again [ Picture of Gyles face with the caption – GYLES. ] Already found guilty of demanding and accepting thousands of dollars in bribe money, corrupt Ward 5 Councillor Cliff Gyles will stand trial again next year on charges that he violated municipal election rules. The Mississauga politician's trial is scheduled for Jan. 12-14 in Brampton provincial court, where he’ll face two charges under the Municipal Election Act: exceeding the maximum campaign expense limit in 2000 and giving a financial statement and auditor's report that didn't reflect his election campaign expenses. Under terms of the Municipal Elections Act, councillors who exceed their election campaign spending limits can lose their seats in office. Just two months ago, Gyles was found guilty on four criminal counts --- two counts of municipal corruption and two counts of breach of trust ---- after demanding and accepting $35,000 in bribes from two Malton businessmen in 2000 and 2001 in return for approval on two unrelated rezoning applications. Madam Justice Bonnie Wein, the judge overseeing the criminal matter, ordered Gyles be relieved of his duties as both a city and regional councillor until his sentencing hearing tomorrow. Under the Ontario Municipal Act (OMA), which sets rules and regulations for elected officials, there is nothing that states an elected official must resign when convicted of a criminal offence. * See Councillor page A5 Councillor on trial * Continued from page A1 If Gyles serves time in prison, only then would he be forced to vacate his seat. But a jail sentence can be delayed by appeal, and in theory, the convicted party could continue to serve on council until a decision is made, said the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. In Brampton court Friday, Mr. Justice Morris Perozak turned down a motion by Gyles' lawyer, Alan Gold, to have the election charges quashed because the City of Mississauga withheld crucial information from their clerk and the court. Earlier this summer, Gold told the judge a letter from a senior Ontario crown attorney to the City of Mississauga in November of 2001 stated neither he nor s boss believed there were grounds to prosecute or convict Gyles after reviewing the auditor's report on the politician's 2000 election campaign expenses. The audit concluded Gyles may have broken several rules under the Municipal Elections Act. But the City's lawyer, George Rust-D'Eye, told the court the crown's letter simply stated the Ontario Crown Attorney's office "didn't have enough information to arrive at a legal opinion.”
[COMMENTS BY DON B. - ]
|