Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Preliminary matters
1 A M'mm-hmm.
2 Q If we look in your resume or your CV and if we
3 turn in it to page 4 we see some of the articles
4 that you've published, and under item E "Policy
5 Reports and Publications" we see the first one,
6 "How Have Policy Approaches to Polygamy Responded
7 to Women's Experiences and Rights."
8 A Right.
9 Q And as I understand it that references the paper
10 you wrote for the Status of Women Canada at that
11 time?
12 A That's the one.
13 Q And insofar as it leads to what work you later did
14 at Bountiful what were you saying in that paper in
15 part with respect to the need for information?
16 A In that paper I came to the conclusion -- based on
17 a review of secondary sources primarily pertaining
18 to women in polygamy, I came to the conclusion
19 that there was insufficient primary material with
20 respect to polygamy as it's experienced by women
21 in the North American context, but especially in
22 the Canadian context. There was no -- very
23 little, very few in the way of primary sources on
24 that particular topic. And my conclusion with
25 respect to the report that was prepared for Status
26 of Women was that before law reform was considered
27 in connection with section 293 of the Criminal
28 Code that it was critical to pursue additional
29 research that would assess on the ground the way
30 in which polygamy is experienced by women in
31 plural marriage communities.
32 Q Thank you. And when you -- in essence you advised
33 the Status of Women Canada of your view in that
34 regard?
35 A I did.
36 Q And when you were doing the research for the SWC
37 paper were you, in fact, contacted by women from
38 Bountiful?
39 A Yes, I was contacted by about three or four women
40 from the community.
41 Q And at that time did you consider it realistic to
42 incorporate the input you had received from them
43 at that stage?
44 A When they contacted me I was actually quite
45 surprised that they would have contacted someone
46 from outside of their group. They were aware of
47 who I was because of the names of the commissioned
8
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 approach?
2 A I approached the SSHRC, or the Social Sciences and
3 Humanities Research Council of Canada.
4 Q And it is a federal institution?
5 A It is.
6 Q And you sought funding from SSHRC in 2006?
7 A Yes.
8 Q And that was a request to undertake empirical
9 qualitative research, and the word "qualitative"
10 as I understand is a term of art which we will
11 come to, but to undertake empirical qualitative
12 research to examine the lived experiences of women
13 living in polygamy?
14 A Yes.
15 Q And you were granted funding by the SSHRC after
16 you put in your grant proposal?
17 A Yes, I was funded.
18 Q And that funding was intended to enable you to
19 pursue what I'm calling field research between
20 2006 and 2009?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And I want to stress a little bit of the review
23 methodology that SSHRC employs.
24 Does it bring in peer review?
25 A It does. So your proposal is submitted to a
26 number of peer reviewers through a process that is
27 anonymized on my end, so I don't know who the
28 reviewers are but the reviewers typically know who
29 I am, and they are considered to be experts in the
30 field and they're chosen by SSHRC, although there
31 is a process in the application process where you
32 can nominate reviewers but SSHRC is not bound to
33 select those individuals.
34 And so the number of reviewers, peer
35 reviewers, who are experts in your field can range
36 from two to four. And pursuant to that they
37 submit reports and then there is an administrative
38 committee within SSHRC that then looks at the
39 reviews that have been submitted by the peers and
40 assesses and weights based on evaluation of both
41 the substance of the proposed research as well as
42 the academic's own publication and pedagogical
43 record
44 Q Thank you. And in your application to the SSHRC
45 for funding you set out your experience with
46 respect to conducting field research and linked
47 that to a request for funding to include
10
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 A Yes.
2 Q And just in a sentence or two tell His Lordship
3 what the focus group was, or at least what the
4 group was that you were seeking to learn more from
5 in that study?
6 A The group I was aiming to get information from
7 were parents with preschool-age children who were
8 attending preschools or day cares in Montreal --
9 in the city of Montreal.
10 Q Very well. And lastly by way of your own study,
11 Professor, or experience or both in what I call
12 field work, you have had -- worked with the
13 research ethics board at McGill -- excuse me, at
14 Montreal's Children's Hospital?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And there you -- on the board you have had two
17 hats, if you will, a legal representative and a
18 community representative?
19 A Yes. That's right.
20 Q And you did that work between 2004 and 2008?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And in that work you reviewed clinical research
23 protocols?
24 A Yes.
25 Q And those are information submitted to health care
26 professionals affiliated with the hospital?
27 A That's right.
28 Q And some of that research was qualitative in
29 nature as well?
30 A Yes.
31 Q And on the research ethics board at Montreal
32 Children's Hospital you gained exposure to various
33 types of research projects?
34 A I did.
35 Q And prior to that, that was '04 to '08, when you
36 were -- back when you were a law student from '95
37 to '99, you had been a research assistant in the
38 McGill Clinical Trials Research Group?
39 A Yes.
40 Q And that is under the auspices of the McGill
41 biomedical ethics unit?
42 A That's right.
43 Q And let me come back now to 2005 and the Status of
44 Women Canada.
45 A M'mm-hmm.
46 Q And we've heard from what you said that they
47 accepted your proposal for research occurring on
15
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 polygamy?
2 A M'mm-hmm.
3 Q And as we've heard your opinion was that more
4 knowledge was needed from the field?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Now, in this letter that I've put in front of
7 His Lordship, Exhibit 1 in this voir dire, if you
8 can now move, so we don't repeat, over to page 4.
9 A Okay.
10 Q And now I'm at the bottom of page 4 and it says
11 there, based on the Status of Women Canada
12 research, SWC research, and this is pre getting
13 the funding to review the women in Bountiful, you
14 had reached this view that someone with juridical
15 training and expertise in family law and criminal
16 law would be appropriately positioned.
17 And over on page 5 of this letter is a topic
18 which links into this. As I understand it among
19 legal scholars there has been a body of writing
20 developed on the need for carrying out empirical
21 research for meaningful legal study; is that fair?
22 A That's fair. There are some sources that are
23 cited here that send that message.
24 Q And they're -- not to be too mundane in the
25 expression of it, but they're starting to say that
26 before you start telling us what the law should be
27 go find out how it will affect the relevant
28 people?
29 A Yeah, I think it's fair to communicate it that
30 way, and another way of communicating it perhaps
31 is to say that there are many ways of doing legal
32 research that is solid and good legal research
33 that will make a contribution, and that speaking
34 to individuals who are affected by law is one
35 important way of doing appropriate legal research.
36 Q Very well. And in this letter, if you will go
37 over to page 6, there's a reference to the fact
38 that in addition to the experience and knowledge
39 you've earned in the various projects you've
40 described you've been guided by literature
41 developed by academics in law on deploying
42 different empirical and qualitative research
43 strategies?
44 A Yes.
45 Q And those are footnoted as footnote 6?
46 A Yes, these are examples.
47 Q Yes, yes. And when you applied to the SSHRC as
16
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 referencing yourself?
2 A Yes.
3 Q But then you go on in the first bullet to point
4 out your expertise is essentially legal and
5 particularly family, and then the second bullet
6 you say:
7
8 The field research proposed here is rooted in
9 a methodology that might be characterized
10 primarily as sociological.
11
12 So you seek research assistance from a grad
13 student in sociology to assist in the design of
14 the interview strategies techniques and
15 structures, and then you point out your own
16 qualitative research experience at McGill.
17 And going back into the body of your -- of the
18 letter that we're talking about here, back at
19 page 6 of the letter at Exhibit 1.
20 A M'mm-hmm.
21 Q We see that the SSHRC first research proposal that
22 was granted in '06, and once you had that part of
23 your task was to recruit the appropriate grad
24 student in sociology and anthropology?
25 A Yes.
26 Q And that work on your part is touched upon at the
27 bottom of page 6 and the top of page 7 --
28 A M'mm-hmm.
29 Q -- of the letter and colleagues in sociology and
30 anthropology replied that they did not have a
31 current grad student to recommend; however, two,
32 one in sociology and one in anthropology,
33 recommended, and the phrase in the letter is a
34 stellar undergraduate student who was just about
35 to complete her undergraduate degree and had both
36 the academic ability and practical fieldwork. I
37 take it that word didn't originate with you to
38 describe her, it originated with one or other of
39 the professors?
40 A With my colleagues, yes.
41 Q And they expressed the view to you that she as an
42 honours student, and I guess the person she was
43 obviously, and who had been trained formally in
44 qualitative methods was the appropriate person?
45 A Yes.
46 Q And you subsequently met that person, and
47 obviously, My Lord, I would be content to name her
18
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 and Society?
2 A Yes.
3 Q And this was published before your first field
4 trip to Bountiful?
5 A It was.
6 Q And this article which was entitled in part, as I
7 say, reflecting on research in Bountiful, was also
8 peer reviewed?
9 A It was peer reviewed.
10 Q And the abstract for this piece is found, not at
11 the beginning but the end, at page 141, is a
12 distillation of what this article is saying and in
13 a sentence or two what is it saying?
14 A So this article studies the way in which a legal
15 scholar can and should carry out empirical
16 research in a religious community with women in
17 that community, particularly of a religious
18 community that has come under public scrutiny and
19 that's viewed as being -- commonly viewed as being
20 hostile to the outside world.
21 In the article I think about and review
22 different types of challenges that a researcher
23 doing this kind of work would face, categorizing
24 these challenges as practical challenges or
25 conceptual challenges and identify what these
26 particular challenges would look like on the
27 ground in this community, but ultimately conclude
28 that even though there are some important
29 challenges to be reckoned with that the research
30 as a whole merits pursuit.
31 Q And your first trip, Professor Campbell, was in
32 2008?
33 A Yes.
34 Q And how did you arrange contact with the women
35 whom you eventually interviewed?
36 A Okay. So there were different methods. I began
37 by speaking with the women who had contacted me
38 when I initially did research for Status of Women
39 Canada and went back to those women and had
40 indicated that I now had the funding and
41 possibility to return to the community to do this
42 type of work. However, I did not want to just
43 rely on those individuals so I worked with
44 research assistant and thereby contacted women
45 whose identifying information was known through
46 things like internet sites and even Canada 411,
47 contacted women who had spoken out about the
20
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
In chief on qualifications by Mr. Macintosh (voir dire)
1 A No.
2 Q And you don't claim to have any specific expertise
3 in anthropology?
4 A No.
5 Q And you're not a psychologist?
6 A I'm not a psychologist.
7 Q And you don't claim any specific expertise in that
8 field either?
9 A No.
10 Q And I take it you don't have any specific
11 expertise in religion or theology; is that
12 correct?
13 A That's correct.
14 Q Do you know what ethnography is?
15 A Yes.
16 THE COURT: Sorry, could you keep your voice up,
17 Mr. Samuels.
18 MR. SAMUELS: Sorry, My Lord.
19 Q You know what ethnography is?
20 A I do.
21 Q Are you trained as an ethnographer?
22 A I am not.
23 Q You don't claim to be an expert in ethnography?
24 A I do not.
25 Q Would you consider the field in which you did your
26 qualitative research to be in the field of
27 sociology or anthropology or psychology or in some
28 other area?
29 A I consider it to be in the field of law primarily,
30 bordering on sociology and anthropology.
31 Q When my friend Mr. Macintosh was asking you
32 questions you made reference to some work you did
33 for Professor Van Praagh?
34 A Yes.
35 Q How many interviews did you actually conduct
36 yourself?
37 A I don't remember exactly. Probably between five
38 and ten.
39 Q It's my understanding from the information that's
40 been provided that you've never taken any formal
41 courses in qualitative research methodology; is
42 that correct?
43 A That's correct.
44 MR. SAMUELS: My Lord, I would like to refer to a
45 binder of materials which I am going to hand up
46 and which is in front of the witness and I will go
47 through what is in the binder. It's put together
28
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Mr. Samuels (voir dire)
1 relationships of meaning.
2
3 Do you see that?
4 A I do.
5 Q And you've agreed with me that you did not have
6 extensive and prolonged engagement.
7 A I do agree that it was less than Peters.
8 Q But you agreed with me earlier that it was not
9 extensive and pronged?
10 MR. MACINTOSH: Well, I don't think that was defined at
11 all, My Lord.
12 THE COURT: Why don't you ask the question more
13 directly then, rather than suggesting she said it
14 previously.
15 MR. SAMUELS: I will be happy to go back in the
16 transcript and find it.
17 MR. MACINTOSH: My Lord, I don't know what this
18 professor means by it and it wasn't put in that
19 context, that's all.
20 MR. SAMUELS: I'll rely on the transcript, thank you,
21 My Lord.
22 THE COURT: Thank you.
23 MR. SAMUELS:
24 Q Is it now your evidence that you had extensive and
25 prolonged engagement in Bountiful?
26 A My statement as to the effect that the research
27 that I had in Bountiful was perhaps less than that
28 conducted by Peters, who spent over a year in her
29 community. However, if you're asking me with
30 respect to this barometer of extensive and
31 prolonged engagement I would actually indicate
32 that I have had extensive and prolonged engagement
33 with the community as I understand this term, not
34 necessarily being only onsite but by ongoing
35 research that is not yet finished.
36 Q You were there for five days conducting 17
37 interviews the first time?
38 A Yes.
39 Q And for I think 10 days the second time?
40 A Seven.
41 Q Seven days?
42 A M'mm-hmm, the second time. And I just received
43 SSHRC funding to return to do further research in
44 the coming year.
45 Q Right. Do you know why -- do you understand why
46 Professor Creswell says "extended and prolonged
47 engagement is needed for a phenomenological
40
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Mr. Samuels (voir dire)
1 study"?
2 A I do, and he distinguishes that from the
3 ethnography which is the first to list which he
4 describes as living onsite, which is more akin to
5 Peters' work. And from my understanding of
6 Creswell he's suggesting that this is important in
7 order to gain the depth of the narrative that he
8 sees as important for the -- he indicates the
9 small number of subjects through extensive and
10 prolonged engagement, so getting that -- the
11 in-depth understanding of how these participants
12 would appreciate the phenomenon in question is --
13 it is to obtain that is essential to have the
14 extensive and prolonged contact as he describes
15 it.
16 Q You can put that book aside for the moment,
17 please?
18 A Okay.
19 Q Thank you.
20 THE COURT: Did you want to mark the extract?
21 MR. SAMUELS: Yes, thank you, My Lord.
22 THE CLERK: My Lord, might be there a court copy.
23 THE COURT: Would you give another copy to Madam
24 Registrar? Any objections?
25 THE CLERK: Exhibit 3 on voir dire My Lord.
26 THE COURT: Thank you.
27
28 EXHIBIT 3: 4 page p/c document; first page titled
29 Research Design..., Third Edition by John W.
30 Creswell
31
32 MR. SAMUELS:
33 Q Professor Campbell, you would agree with me that
34 you don't claim to have and do not have any
35 expertise in quantitative analysis?
36 A That's right.
37 Q You don't have any expertise in statistical
38 analysis?
39 A No, I don't.
40 Q For example, you wouldn't be able to tell the
41 Court how large a sample size needs to be based on
42 a given total population in order to determine
43 either confidence levels or standard deviations or
44 any of that?
45 A That's right.
46 Q And you didn't do any of that type of analysis?
47 A No, I didn't.
41
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Mr. Samuels (voir dire)
1 community.
2 Q You understood the society to be very patriarchal?
3 A I did.
4 Q And with a high degree of control exercised by the
5 church leaders?
6 A I wasn't sure of the level of control that was
7 exercised, given that the women from the group had
8 contacted me in 2004/2005. So that to me
9 suggested that there may be less control than that
10 which had been presented by media portrayals of
11 the group.
12 Q Do you know if there would be any way for a
13 qualitative researcher to know whether the women
14 who volunteered to talk to you, to be interviewed,
15 might have been asked to do so by their religious
16 leaders?
17 A How could the researcher have done that? Is that
18 what you're asking?
19 Q Well, first of all, did you consider that
20 possibility?
21 A I considered that possibility.
22 Q Did you take any steps to find out if that was the
23 case?
24 A No.
25 Q You didn't even ask the women that question?
26 A I didn't.
27 Q Why not?
28 A Because I felt like that would be insulting to
29 them.
30 Q Are you aware of what qualitative researchers
31 identify as limitations of focus group
32 interviewing?
33 A Yes.
34 Q Can you tell His Lordship, please, what those
35 limitations are?
36 A The limitations that I have seen identified in the
37 literature relate to the fact that when
38 interviewed in a group there's a risk that the
39 most vocal or prominent members of the group will
40 take over the discussion and there will be a
41 reticence on the part of shyer perhaps less
42 powerful group members to speak out in a way that
43 exhibits disagreement with the more vocal members
44 of the focus group. And that there may be a risk
45 furthermore that information that a person holds
46 as confidential won't be disclosed in a group
47 setting given that others beyond the researcher
51
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Mr. Samuels (voir dire)
1 examples.
2 Q Yes. So one was working with Professor Van
3 Praagh?
4 A M'mm-hmm.
5 Q As a graduate student at McGill, when you were at
6 McGill?
7 A Right.
8 Q The second was speaking with three experts in the
9 domain of public health law?
10 A Yes.
11 Q They weren't lawyers but they were a nutritionist,
12 epidemiologist and --
13 A Physician.
14 Q And a physician.
15 A M'mm-hmm.
16 Q And in the context of rounding out your masters
17 thesis?
18 A Yes.
19 Q The third was doing the seminar with Professor
20 White and the questionnaire you did for the day
21 care parents?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And finally it was your experience on the research
24 and ethics board at Montreal Children's Hospital?
25 A Yes.
26 Q And I notice that in the letter there that was
27 referred to board's plural. Have you been on more
28 than one board or was it just the board of the
29 Montreal Children's Hospital?
30 A I was on the board at the Montreal Children's
31 Hospital and I also served as a member of the
32 research ethics board at the MUHC which is the
33 McGill University Health Centre, so basically with
34 the faculty of medicine and that's not listed here
35 but I serve in that capacity for I believe a year
36 possibly a little bit more but as an alternative
37 member. So I wasn't a consistent member but I sat
38 in to review protocols when the ordinary legal
39 representative wasn't present.
40 Q And you once again were there to be the legal
41 representative?
42 A Yes.
43 Q So -- and that was before your work at Bountiful?
44 A Yes.
45 Q That was all of your experience related to
46 qualitative --
47 A Prior to.
57
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 Q -- research?
2 A M'mm-hmm.
3 Q Your work with Professor Van Praagh, and, I take
4 it, Professor Van Praagh is a lawyer?
5 A She's a legal scholar.
6 Q She's a law professor --
7 A Yes.
8 Q -- at McGill University as well?
9 A Yes.
10 Q And so she doesn't have any training in sociology
11 or anthropology or?
12 A I'm not aware.
13 Q And do you know whether she had any particular
14 training in doing qualitative research?
15 A No, I don't know.
16 Q And when you did your work -- you were an
17 undergraduate law student at that time when you
18 were working with Professor Van Praagh?
19 A I was.
20 Q And you were taking direction from Professor Van
21 Praagh, I take it, as far as the research goes?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And you didn't speak with a sociologist or
24 anthropologist or other expert in the social
25 sciences?
26 A No, no.
27 Q You said that you -- did you conduct between five
28 and ten interviews or was that in combination with
29 Professor Van Praagh as well?
30 A Between five and ten were -- that's the global
31 number of interviews I would have participated in
32 either alone or with my professor.
33 Q And do you have any sense out of the five to ten
34 how many you did alone?
35 A I think I did -- I can remember two possibly three
36 alone.
37 Q And how much time did you spend in the Hasidic
38 Jewish community in Montreal, the community you
39 were studying?
40 A Well, you see that's a little bit hard to answer
41 because it's not really a defined community with
42 geographic borders, so there's neighbourhoods
43 where there are many Hasidic Jewish individuals
44 but in terms of being in a community proper it's
45 very hard to locate, so there was no kind of set
46 time where I went to live anywhere. There were
47 various neighbourhoods in question where these
58
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 interviewed?
2 A So my direct conclusion, what I can say I was told
3 for sure, is limited to the 22, but in terms of
4 possibilities beyond that, right, I'm not saying
5 that necessarily it happens, but there's a
6 possibility that what is set out here is
7 occurring.
8 Q And what are you basing that possibility on?
9 MR. MACINTOSH: The first three or four times it was
10 based on her interviews of the 22 women. I think
11 that's been covered.
12 THE COURT: I think I have that point.
13 MS. GREATHEAD:
14 Q Now, you didn't interview any children either?
15 A I didn't.
16 Q No. And you attended the community for five days
17 in 2008?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And seven days in 2009?
20 A Yes.
21 Q So did the five days include travel time from
22 Montreal to --
23 A Yes.
24 Q -- Cranbrook or Creston?
25 A So on my travel days we also visited the
26 community.
27 Q So it would have been about a half day on your
28 travel days?
29 A Fair enough, yeah.
30 Q And you had a travel day on either side?
31 A Yeah. To go home, yeah.
32 Q So it was four full days in 2008?
33 A Yeah, if you want we could knock off maybe the
34 morning of the Monday, because the first trip was
35 Monday to Friday, so it's possible to knock off
36 the morning of Monday and the afternoon of Friday.
37 Q And the same for 2009?
38 A Yes.
39 Q The seven days included travel days?
40 A They did.
41 Q And you could knock off a half day on either end
42 there?
43 A Sure.
44 Q And I take it that you had arranged beforehand
45 that you were going to be travelling there so the
46 times of the interviews were prearranged? The
47 women knew you were coming, in other words?
63
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 A Yes.
2 Q And that you would agree with me though if you're
3 in Bountiful for four or so days in 2008 the rest
4 of the 360 days in the year you're not there and
5 you don't know what they're wearing?
6 A That's true.
7 Q Now, you have been asked by Mr. Macintosh a number
8 of questions about the publications you've
9 written --
10 A Yes.
11 Q In relation to polygamy, and there was a list of
12 those publications?
13 A Yes.
14 Q And all of these publications stem from your two
15 visits in 2008 and 2009 to Bountiful?
16 A So they draw on that but they also draw on other
17 research as well.
18 Q Right.
19 A M'mm-hmm.
20 Q They're related to the time you spent in
21 Bountiful?
22 A Yeah, they're related to secondary sources
23 primarily that I would have read as background for
24 this type of project.
25 Q Now, you have provided us with transcripts of the
26 interviews that you did both in 2008 and 2009?
27 A Yes.
28 Q And you have a copy of those?
29 A I think so.
30 MS. GREATHEAD: So, My Lord Chief Justice, perhaps I
31 can have this marked as the next exhibit on the
32 voir dire and it will be sealed.
33 THE COURT: Exhibit 5.
34 THE CLERK: Exhibit 5 on voir dire, My Lord.
35 THE COURT: Yes.
36
37 EXHIBIT 5: 1 white 4" binder untitled containing
38 transcripts; 1 page Index; Tabs 1 - 26; p/c
39 Sealed pursuant to Consent Order of Chief Justice
40 Bauman dated Nov 23, 2010
41
42 MS. GREATHEAD:
43 Q And Professor Campbell, did you do the redactions
44 on the transcripts?
45 A I did the redactions. My employer also had a look
46 at the redactions and did some of that as well, in
47 addition to the redactions I had provided.
65
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 A Sure, yes.
2 Q And the notion was that you wanted to avoid you
3 putting words into their mouth?
4 A Generally, yes.
5 Q Now -- so tab 2, page 71, the A in the transcript
6 refers to you?
7 A To me, yes.
8 Q So you asked the question:
9
10 What about giving birth? I've read stories
11 about when a woman gives birth that says she
12 often goes to the hospital. Does she go with
13 her husband?
14
15 PH: yes.
16
17 And there would be no worry about that?
18
19 PE: What do you mean?
20
21 Like because I've read that if you have a
22 baby --
23
24 And this is you here, Angela Campbell?
25 A Yes.
26 Q
27 Like I've read that if you've had a baby you
28 may not want to go with your husband, like,
29 he's already registered with another woman
30 and there would be a kind of reputation of
31 polygamy in the marriage.
32
33 And then "unclear."
34
35 Well, it used to be like that.
36
37 A Yes.
38 Q Was the answer.
39 A Yes.
40 Q If I could have you refer to tab 9. At page 233.
41 And Professor Campbell, could you read out the
42 questions starting with "that actually"?
43 A So this is following from the prior start of the
44 question. So do you want me to start with the
45 preceding AC where it actually begins? It might
46 not make sense otherwise.
47 Q Sure.
68
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 A Okay. So it says:
2
3 It's really interesting though because we
4 were talking with some women today about, you
5 know, the need for something or the community
6 like --
7
8 Ane then it's unclear as to whether the word is
9 "clinics." And then the participant says:
10
11 Yes, yeah.
12
13 That actually --
14
15 This is me again.
16
17 -- can address like the reason in the
18 community [inaudible], because one of the
19 things that came up last year was that if
20 you're from a place like Bountiful that's
21 very misunderstood and kind of laden with a
22 bunch of assumptions cast on it by people
23 from the outside that going to find a
24 resource like someone having a drug problem
25 or somebody having a crisis like all
26 teenagers go through it to some extent, but a
27 real struggle with identity and belonging,
28 trying to see a counsellor or social worker
29 or psychologist from the outside can be
30 really difficult because the challenge that;
31 you're facing gets linked back to the fact
32 that you're from [redacted] and not that
33 there's something that really needs to be
34 addressed apart from where you grew up.
35
36 Q Answer, "yeah."
37 A Answer, yeah.
38 Q And then you go on:
39
40 So, if on the outside you're, you know, for
41 example redacted why would a couple go to
42 marriage counselling if she's in a polygamous
43 marriage. The counsel would just say well,
44 you're not a polygamous marriage. Get rid of
45 that and you'll get rid of your problem.
46
47 A Right.
69
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1
2 So they're talking about the services they could
3 access there?
4 A This is the participant speaking.
5 Q The participant speaking, yes, yeah.
6 A Well, it's a different context altogether than the
7 one from the prior comments.
8 Q They're talking about contacting a doctor in town?
9 A Yeah, the other participant was talking about
10 counselling services.
11 Q No, but those are both services outside of the
12 community?
13 A Sure.
14 Q Yeah. And at same tab, page 432. And this is the
15 participant speaking here again about their
16 doctor. There's a large section redacted at 1052?
17 A Yes.
18 Q And then it says:
19
20 Even from my own personal experience I mean,
21 my doctor has just been wonderful for me.
22 I -- laugh -- she has helped me, pulled me
23 through my tough times. And you know, today
24 if I had a need or any I just call her and
25 she's there and I find that everybody finds
26 that their person that, you know, and --
27
28 And then you ask "is she the person who" and it's
29 redacted. Answer: "[Redacted] I actually had
30 [redacted] deliver my baby but I still went to her
31 because, I don't know, she's a neutral zone for
32 me. Sure."
33
34 Answer: "I could go to her and tell her
35 exactly how I felt about whatever and that was
36 okay.
37
38 MR. DICKSON: Is there a question?
39 MS. GREATHEAD:
40 Q And so that was the answer given by the
41 participant there and recorded?
42 A Yes.
43 Q And at tab 19 page 464.
44 So Professor Campbell, halfway down the page
45 they see you and you're asking this question:
46
47 Yeah, well, what about, like, do you ever get
72
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1 A It was.
2 Q Did you conduct all of the interviews?
3 A I did.
4 Q And you will see at participant 17 about halfway
5 down the page the participant here is talking
6 about services starting with the word "and": She
7 says:
8
9 And the people there have always been so good
10 to us, like, there's a couple of -- a couple
11 that have little issues but pretty much in
12 general people have been so good to us and
13 being fair and treating us like people rather
14 than criminals, so I never once felt like I
15 couldn't go somewhere and get help or go to a
16 doctor, you know.
17
18 So again this participant is expressing the
19 ease of which to get services outside Bountiful?
20 A Specifically to go to the doctor, yes.
21 Q And page 526. At P 17 they're talking about:
22
23 Up until [inaudible] church depression was
24 not considered an illness, it was considered
25 the devil is in you, snap out of it, you
26 know. [Throat clear]. So it was really hard
27 to address because you can't get medication
28 for devil being in you, you know, it's like
29 go back and pray, you know. So I think in
30 the past it's been really hard and I think
31 it's hard today because it's hard in five
32 years to really change how you feel about an
33 illness and you don't think it's an illness.
34 But I do think more women have gotten help
35 recently and I think we're also considering
36 that having ten kids is really hard. It's
37 hard mentally, it's hard physically.
38
39 So again it's the same participant talking about
40 services?
41 MR. DICKSON: Is that a question?
42 MS. GREATHEAD:
43 Q Is that right?
44 A Yes.
45 Q And at tab 26, page 560. Sorry, starting at 559.
46 You're the interviewer. And very last question on
47 the bottom there:
75
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1
2 Is there ever a moment or has there ever been
3 a moment where you felt apprehensive about
4 leaving the community to go into the city?
5 Answer, no. To access resources? Never
6 never. I go to [inaudible] a day.
7
8 So again this person is expressing the view
9 that --
10 A They come and go.
11 Q Yeah. And so with the exception of the first two
12 examples I took you to, where there was leading
13 questions, you'll agree all of the other examples
14 the people indicated that they could access
15 services without a problem essentially?
16 A Yeah. So these are people who indicated that they
17 could access resources and services generally
18 speaking in the Creston or outside communities.
19 MR. DICKSON: By examples you mean the examples that
20 you put to the witness?
21 MS. GREATHEAD: Yes.
22 MR. DICKSON: Thank you.
23 MS. GREATHEAD:
24 Q And so if we go back to paragraph 132 in your
25 affidavit number 2. And sorry -- Professor
26 Campbell, do you have that?
27 A I do, yes.
28 Q You state:
29
30 It is possible that the women in Bountiful
31 have traditionally chosen not to seek out
32 such domestic support or counselling services
33 because this is seen as inconsistent with
34 community norms. Yet it is also possible
35 that such services are not accessed on
36 account of a fear that abuse allegations
37 would trigger criminal investigations and
38 prosecutions related to polygamy.
39
40 Now, would you agree with me, Professor
41 Campbell, that from these transcript excerpts that
42 we just went through we can discern that there
43 would be a number of women that you interviewed
44 that wouldn't agree with the generalization you
45 put at paragraph 132?
46 A I just want to clarify that the types of services
47 spoken to in the excerpts that we were going
76
Angela Campbell (for the Amicus)
Cross-exam on qualifications by Ms. Greathead (voir dire)
1
2 A cautious delineation of the scope of the
3 proposed expert evidence and strict adherence
4 to those boundaries if the evidence as
5 submitted are essential. The case law
6 demonstrates that over-reaching by expert
7 experts is probably the most common fault
8 leading to reversals on appeal.
9
10 Now, that comment is more than likely focussed
11 primarily on criminal trials of course, My Lord,
12 but the same caution with respect to the process
13 of fact finding in a civil context is applicable.
14 Skip over a few paragraphs until we hit
15 paragraph 13. One of the criteria set out by
16 Mohan in determining the admissibility of an
17 expert report is the question of necessity, and I
18 have underlined a portion of the quote from Mohan
19 referring back to its decision in the 1980s Abbey:
20
21 If on the proven facts a judge or jury can
22 form their own conclusions without help then
23 the opinion of the expert is unnecessary.
24
25 Now, in Mohan the Court further noted:
26
27 The word "helpful" is not quite appropriate
28 and sets too low a standard. What is
29 required is that the opinion be necessary and
30 that it provide information which is likely
31 to be outside the experience and knowledge of
32 a judge or jury. The Court further
33 emphasized that in order for expert evidence
34 to be admissible the subject matter of the
35 inquiry must be such that ordinary people are
36 unlikely to form a correct judgment about it
37 if unassisted by persons with special
38 knowledge.
39
40 I take you now to paragraph 16 where we have
41 reproduced a quote from Professor Pachiocco
42 [phonetic], if that's how it's pronounced, whose
43 thoughts or sentiments were adopted by Justice
44 Major in Regina v. DD and I will just focus on the
45 underlined portion:
46
47 When should we place the legal system and
94
Submissions re Dr. Campbell's expert qualification
By Mr. Cameron
1 expressly.
2 MS. HORSMAN: She did say that, My Lord. And that's
3 true, it might be possible and anything can be
4 possible. But given that Ms. Campbell herself
5 agrees that as a matter of qualitative method you
6 can't draw any generalizations beyond the 22, it's
7 not simply not helpful to have her do so, but it's
8 dangerous to suggest that you can in the context
9 of an expert affidavit.
10 Now, the second point I wanted to make on 132,
11 and 134 for that the matter, is you will recall
12 that Ms. Greathead put a rather lengthy series of
13 transcript excerpts to Professor Campbell in the
14 course of her cross and it went to the opinion
15 that was apparently expressed by Professor
16 Campbell in paragraphs 132 and 134 that women
17 living in polygamous communities would have
18 difficulty accessing services. And I think
19 Professor Campbell's response was, no, that's not
20 what I'm saying in those paragraphs. They can go
21 and get groceries and they can go to a doctor for
22 an ear appointment, but what they can't do is
23 access any sort of counselling or mental health
24 services or any sort of service that might
25 publicly identify them as polygamists. Now, my
26 first point on that, My Lord, is that that's not
27 what the interview participants said in the
28 transcript references that Ms. Greathead put to
29 her. And that goes to the handout, My Lord.
30 This goes somewhat beyond the
31 cross-examination that Ms. Greathead carried out.
32 What we have done here, My Lord, is divide the
33 summary of the transcript into themes.
34 THE COURT: All right.
35 MS. HORSMAN: So that, for example, on the first page,
36 My Lord, you will see the first heading is
37 "Interview Technique" and immediately underneath
38 is the word "objectives" and then there's a quote
39 from Professor Campbell's affidavit setting out
40 what her objective is.
41 MR. DICKSON: My Lord, I'm sorry to rise on this. I
42 have a couple of concerns about this. First, just
43 on the technical matter it's -- this document
44 would have to be sealed. It's -- I'm concerned
45 about references to the transcripts in it and
46 again I --
47 THE COURT: It's in the same category as Exhibit --
108
Submissions re Dr. Campbell's expert qualification
By Ms. Horsman