Ex-justice of the peace faces charge

Tom Foulds accused of assault of his partner

An ex-Toronto justice of the peace, who was fired this month for interfering in a criminal case involving his partner, has been charged with assaulting her, the Star has learned.

While Tom Foulds, 60, faces an assault charge, the complainant herself has also been charged with assault with a weapon, with Foulds being the alleged victim.

“Based upon my review of the evidence provided to date, I am firmly of the view that there is no merit to (the charge against Foulds). If anything, Mr. Foulds was assaulted and only used reasonable force in self-defence,” Foulds’ lawyer, Daniel Kirby, told the Star in an email earlier this month.

“The alleged victim has been charged with assaulting him with a weapon. His injury was minimal and the complainant in the charge against him suffered no injury. Once this matter is thoroughly reviewed by the Crown attorney, I would be shocked if it were allowed to proceed.”

Foulds’ case was heard at the College Park courthouse Tuesday, the same courthouse where Foulds presided for years as a justice of the peace. Foulds himself did not attend the brief hearing.

The case is being prosecuted by a Crown attorney from outside Toronto, a spokesperson for the Ministry of the Attorney General said.

The Crown said in court it has now completed its disclosure of the evidence to the defence. The case returns to court June 12.

Foulds is alleged to have assaulted the woman on March 16, according to court records, and has been ordered to stay at least 25 metres away from her.

The alleged assault occurred on the same day that Foulds filed a motion with the Justices of the Peace Review Council to reconsider its decision finding him guilty of judicial misconduct for interfering in a previous criminal case involving his partner. That motion was later denied.

The alleged incident was not brought up on March 23 before a discipline panel of the council regarding the appropriate punishment that should be handed down for the judicial misconduct. (The panel ultimately made the rare recommendation to the attorney general that Foulds be fired.)

While his partner’s name is not covered by a publication ban in the criminal proceedings, it is covered by a ban with relation to Foulds’ discipline proceedings, in which she was identified simply as “AA.” There is no indication the alleged assault involving Foulds had anything to do with the discipline proceedings.

In those proceedings, the discipline panel found that Foulds repeatedly tried to insert himself in a criminal case in which AA was the alleged victim of an assault by a man identified only as “BB.” The charge against BB was later stayed by the Crown.

Foulds signed what is known as the “information” laying out the charge against BB, despite knowing who he was; repeatedly asked Crown attorneys at the College Park courthouse about the case, as they tried to brush him away; and signed the subpoena requiring his partner AA to testify.

It was the second time that Foulds had been found guilty of judicial misconduct by a discipline panel over a conflict of interest.

He had previously been suspended for seven days without payin 2013 for interfering in the health inspection of a friend’s restaurant.