Verdict in gas plant trial expected in new year

The two sides painted vastly different pictures of evidence

Two former Dalton McGuinty aides will learn their fate Jan. 19 with a verdict in the deleted documents trial stemming from the scrapping of gas-fired power plants before the 2011 election.

Justice Timothy Lipson set the date after prosecutors and defence counsel made final arguments Wednesday in the criminal case against former chief of staff David Livingston and deputy chief Laura Miller.

The two sides painted vastly difference pictures of the evidence, with the Crown arguing the defendants had a “take-no-risks” approach to deleting computer hard drives and the defence calling that an exaggeration.

“There is only one question . . . why did the two accused go to such lengths to have the 20 hard drives wiped?” Crown attorney Tom Lemon said.

Livingston and Miller have pleaded not guilty to attempted mischief to a computer system and unauthorized use of a computer. Charges of breach of trust were dropped earlier this month for lack of evidence and the mischief charge was reduced.

The trial has heard Miller’s common-law spouse, Peter Faist, a computer consultant, was hired to clear the hard drives of McGuinty premier’s office staff not staying on with the Liberal government in February 2013.

That’s when Premier Kathleen Wynne was preparing to take over after McGuinty quit amid controversy over the axing of the power plants in Oakville and Mississauga.

Those hard drives could not be wiped without a special password, which witnesses testified was obtained by Livingston from cabinet secretary Peter Wallace to delete personal information on the computers.

At the time, the minority Liberal government was subject to a legal order from an opposition-controlled legislative committee to produce documents explaining government decisions to close the power plants, which were not popular with area residents.

“You don’t need to do what was done to eliminate a personal photograph . . . a medical record,” Lemon said.

He urged Lipson to consider why Livingston, the “big boss” in the office, would be so concerned if only staffers’ personal information was at stake.

Livingston’s lawyer Brian Gover said there is no proof there were any work-related documents on the computer hard drives.

“There is no direct evidence the accused had the intent the Crown said they had,” he added.