HER AWAY FROM THERE?’
Today, Obodzinski is facing 16 criminal charges, including fraud, theft, attempting to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding, forging a document ( the mandate), two counts of breaking and entering, causing bodily harm and forcible confinement.
Her husband, Trzciakowski, faces 10 of the same charges. Kerner, the social worker, has been charged with breaking and entering, theft, forcible confinement, and knowingly obtaining or possessing another person’s identity information to commit an indictable offence.
She’s been suspended from the Quebec order of social workers since September 2014 as she faces 11 charges in front of its disciplinary board since July of that year. Six of those charges deal with her involvement in Piela’s case.
One of the disciplinary charges was dropped, and Kerner pleaded guilty to all but one of the others, including twice producing a psychosocial report for a mandate in case of incapacity without having the information needed to properly judge the situation. The board hasn’t rendered a decision yet.
Last July, the Order’s syndic filed another seven disciplinary charges against Kerner for acts that allegedly took place in 2014 for two psychosocial reports she prepared for incapacity mandates for two clients.
Obodzinski, Trzciakowski and Kerner were at the Montreal courthouse f or a hearing l ate last month in the criminal case. Their lawyers refused to comment on this story. The case returns to court later this month. In the civil suit initiated two years ago, a Superior Court judge rendered a decision to nullify the mandate in case of incapacity last November, later amended in December, declaring Piela “able to take care of herself, administer her property and exercise her civil rights.”
The decision was based in part on new medical and psychosocial reports that were produced for the case, both saying Piela is sound of mind.
“From this worker’s first contact with Ms. Piela,” wrote social worker Nathalie Geoffrion, “It became apparent that she is fully lucid and completely oriented to place, person and time. She has excellent short- and long- term memory.”
She pointed out that Piela could easily recite specific amounts of money she had in different bank accounts. She remembered the documents that were in her apartment, could give detailed and con- sistent accounts of her life, and was aware of her personal needs: She knew she was missing her reading glasses and partial dentures.
The report pointed out that in finding a way to escape from the residence, she also showed an ability to problem- solve.
A doctor wrote that she can engage actively in conversations, that she is fully oriented to time and place. “She appears to have excellent memory,” doctor Catherine Ferrier wrote in her conclusion. “This patient is capable of making decisions and managing her assets. She does not require a mandatary.”
Judge Helene Langlois wrote in her December decision that the initial reports prepared on Piela are “unreliable and cannot lead to the conclusion that ( Piela) is incapable.”
For the medical report, the judgment notes that Goldsmith, the doctor, testified she evaluated Piela at Kerner’s request at Piela’s apartment in presence of Obodzinski.
Over 30 minutes, she questioned her on her medical history and health issues, but couldn’t get many answers, the judgment says. The entire visit lasted about an hour, and the medical report was written the same day. Piela testified that she didn’t remember meeting with Goldsmith.
The judge also took into account inconsistencies surrounding the mandate itself. Piela has always denied signing it. It’s written in French, a language she doesn’t understand, and her initials were missing from the bottom of all eight pages, her lawyer argued.
Ultimately, the judge sided with an expert who said Piela’s signature had been forged. “Finally,” judge Langlois writes, “( Obodzinski’s) and the witnesses’ version about the circumstances around the signature of the mandate are not consistent on some aspects."
According to Obodzinski, the mandate was signed in March 2013 at a Starbucks café, where she brought Piela and met with two witnesses.
The first witness was an acquaintance of Obodzinski’s who worked at the coffee shop. According to Obodzinski’s version of that day, the second witness was a man she happened to overhear speaking Russian in the shop, so she asked him to sign as a witness.
Obodzinski testified that the decision to sign the mandate was made that same day, but the first witness said it had been planned a long time ahead.
The second witness confirmed that he was asked unexpectedly to witness the signature, but how he described other details — when he got there, the exchanges that happened before the signature — didn’t match up with Obodzinski’s version of events. All three contradicted each other on which language was used while the mandate was explained to Piela.
“The validity of the mandate has not been established,” the judgment reads.
In late December, Piela smiled as she pushed her walker through the halls of Quebec’s public curator’s offices.
A judge had ordered the curator to take charge of her file while the suit worked its way through the court system. It had been a long two years, but the personal documents that had been taken from her — her will, marriage papers, family photos, and more — were to be returned. A physical manifestation, of sorts, that she’s fully capable of taking care of herself.
She’s also gotten most of her money back: Nearly $ 300,000 that had been transferred to the public curator from the in- trust account has been returned. Cheques for another $ 100,000 were sent to her last week. Another roughly $ 46,000 is gone, spent, and Piela’s lawyer says he is still trying to get it back. Ordered by a judge to account for the money spent from the in- trust account, Gelber wrote that $ 20,000 went to Obodzinski for items and services for Piela. Kerner was paid about $ 5,000 for her social work. Gelber was paid roughly $ 12,000 in legal fees. The rest went to Piela’s rent and a company to clean her apartment.
Just before the New Year, Obodzinski’s lawyer, Jean El Masri, filed an appeal on the decision that nullified the mandate. Piela’s lawyer challenged it, calling it trivial, frivolous and vexatious.
Last Monday, Obodzinski and Piela were both present at the Court of Appeal to hear arguments. They sat far away from each other.
El Masri argued that Obodzinski has known Piela for longer than what was established in the judgment, and that the judge placed too much emphasis on the version of events given by the two witnesses who signed the mandate.
After a roughly 30- minute hearing, a three- judge panel rejected the appeal.
“As some of you may know, we benefit from the service of researchers, and have the chance to study cases ahead of time, which we did here,” Judge Paul Vézina said.
“The Court unanimously agrees that the appeal has no reasonable chance of succeeding,” the written judgment states, noting that it touches only on matters of evidence that have been ruled on.
El Masri refused to comment on the decision.
Piela let out a gasp of relief when her lawyer translated it for her outside the courtroom.
“Thank you, thank you,” she told him as she grabbed his hands. Her laughter echoed through the halls as she slowly made her way out of the courthouse.
“This brings to an end a two- year court battle, in which this 92- yearold woman ( that survived the atrocities of World War II) had to be present in courtrooms on more than 20 occasions,” Piela’s lawyer, Igor Dogaru, told the Montreal Gazette.
“Being a nonagenarian is a privilege,” he said. “The popular wisdom says that those who respect the elderly pave their own road toward success. This brave and courageous woman fully deserves our respect and admiration.”
Piela said she trusts the judicial system will take its course in the criminal case. All she wants to know is why all this happened to her.
She feels safe in her new residence, though her trust in people is shaken and a toll has been taken on her health.
She’s been hospitalized twice since for high blood pressure and heart troubles. When doctors asked what was the cause of her stress, they didn’t initially believe what she told them; it sounded like a delusional story. They went so far as to have a psychiatrist evaluate her, who found nothing wrong.
Asked what she hopes for in the future, Piela thought about it, then spoke in Ukrainian to fully express herself. Her lawyer gave a rough translation: “Maybe one day the sun will shine for me.”
Being a nonagenarian is a privilege ... This brave and courageous woman fully deserves our respect and admiration.