|
In this story, new material appears at the bottom. Tuesday, March 8, 2005 Jury selection underway in Halifax standoff case By BILL POWER / Staff Reporter Jury selection began Monday in the Nova Scotia Supreme Court trial of a couple charged after a three-day standoff with police in Halifax last May. Carline VandenElsen and Lawrence Finck entered not guilty pleas to eight charges each, including unlawful confinement and obstructing police. Justice Robert Wright has set aside three days for jury selection and indicated the trial could last at least six weeks. The court will not sit on Fridays. The Halifax courtroom was filled with prospective jurors. The selection process included questions about prior knowledge of the case. "A juror must be able to make a decision just on information presented at trial," Justice Wright said. A handful of jurors' spots were filled by the end of the day. Throughout most of the proceedings, Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck, who sat beside each other, chatted back and forth, shared whispers and looked over papers together. Ms. VandenElsen was accompanied by her lawyer, Burnley (Rocky) Jones, while Mr. Finck was with lawyer Raymond Kuszelewski. Prosecutors Rick Woodburn and Leonard MacKay are presenting the Crown's case. Justice Wright indicated there will be a lot of evidence to consider and an above average number of witnesses. Halifax Regional Police and RCMP officers involved in the armed standoff on Shirley Street will be called to the stand, as will officials from the province's Community Services Department and staff from the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. Some Shirley Street residents and two local news reporters are also on the lengthy witness list. The only unexpected development Monday was the addition to the evidence list of three weapons and some ammunition, but details were not provided. Police seized a 12-gauge shotgun after the standoff. Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck are charged with violating a court order by detaining and concealing a baby that was to be turned over to the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. They are also charged with unlawful confinement, obstructing police and several weapons offences. The standoff began after police tried to enforce a court order to place a child in the temporary care of Children's Aid. Mr. Finck's mother, who had heart problems and was in the Shirley Street house, died of natural causes during the standoff. source: Trial begins for standoff couple Last Updated Mar 9 2005 06:21 PM AST HALIFAX – A Halifax court is hoping to find out who fired a gun out of a downtown home last year, setting off a three-day armed standoff with police. 
The home of Larry Finck
and Carline VandenElsen on Shirley St.
in central Halifax
The trial of Larry Finck and his wife, Carline VandenElsen, began Wednesday. Both face charges of obstructing police, forcible confinement and contravention of a court order. The charges stem from an incident last May that began when Child Protection Services arrived at the couple's Shirley St. home. The authorities had come to apprehend the pair's baby daughter.
Prosecutors say Finck and VandenElsen refused, barricading themselves, their daughter and Finck's 79-year-old mother inside the two-storey home. Police surrounded the home after a gunshot was fired over their heads. As court heart Wednesday, it's still not clear which of the three adults fired that shot. "It is our contention that Carline VandenElsen fired the gun," said Crown prosecutor Rick Woodburn. 
Larry Finck
Woodburn said the Crown planned to call 25 witnesses before the court, including eye witnesses and police officers to prove the case against the couple. VandenElsen's attorney says his client did not do anything wrong and was only acting in the best interest of her child. "She will testify that she did not fire the gun," said Rockey Jones, counsel for VandenElsen. "Now it's up to the jury, the trier of fact to decide if they believe her, or if it raises some doubt." No other shots were fired during the 67-hour standoff, which ended when Fink and VandenElsen walked out of the house and toward police. VandenElsen had her baby strapped to her chest, and, along with Finck, carried a makeshift stretcher bearing the body of Finck's mother, Mona. Police took the baby and arrested the couple. It was later determined that 79-year-old Mona Fink died of natural causes. Larry Finck's lawyer said his client did not fire the gun either, but stopped short of saying it was the sick, elderly Mona Finck who pulled the trigger. Attorney Ray Kaszelewski tried to clarify for the jury in advance a tape it will hear during the trial. "The actual quote is 'aim high Mona'," said Kaszelewski. "What the jury will hear is that quote put into context. Clearly somebody responded to the police battering ram, and it's our position that it wasn't Larry (Finck)." Five weeks have been set aside for the jury to hear all the evidence. source: The Halifax Herald VandenElsen just a mom trying to protect her baby, trial hears By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter Carline VandenElsen "is not a criminal" but a caring mother who was trying to protect her new baby when Halifax authorities moved in last year to seize the child, her lawyer told a jury Wednesday. "(Ms. VandenElsen), like many mothers, has been faced with some very difficult decisions," Burnley (Rocky) Jones told a Supreme Court jury in Halifax. "But because her children are the most important thing in her life, she has taken a (dislike) to the Children's Aid Society, the police and other authorities." Ms. VandenElsen also has triplets from a previous marriage who are in the custody of her ex-husband in Ontario. "It always boils down to the fact that she has this undying deep love and connection to her children and because she has taken certain actions as a mother, she is now facing these serious criminal charges." Ms. VandenElsen and her husband, Lawrence Finck, are being tried on eight charges stemming from a 67-hour armed standoff with Halifax police last May. During the standoff, at a Shirley Street home owned by Mr. Finck's mother, the older lady - who had heart problems - died of natural causes. The standoff began in the early hours of May 19, after police attempted to enforce a Jan. 15, 2004, court order to place the couple's baby in the temporary care of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. That order was upheld in subsequent reviews. The couple has pleaded not guilty to charges of obstructing police, violating a court order by detaining and concealing a baby who was to be turned over to Children's Aid, possessing a 12-gauge Iver Johnson shotgun and 12-gauge ammunition for a purpose dangerous to the public peace, possessing the 12-gauge shotgun without a licence or registration, discharging a shotgun at four police officers with intent to prevent the couple's arrest, use or threat to use the 12-gauge shotgun while committing an assault on the four officers, using a shotgun while concealing the baby, and using a shotgun in a careless manner. The offences are alleged to have occurred between Jan. 13, 2004, and May 22, 2004. The Crown alleges Ms. VandenElsen fired a shot over the officers' heads during the incident but that Mr. Finck was a party to the offence. But in a statement Mr. Finck gave to police after his arrest, he said his ailing 79-year-old mother, Mona Finck, had fired the shotgun blast, Crown attorney Rick Woodburn told the jury. The Crown intends to play for jurors that statement, in which, it says, Mr. Finck admitted to loading the shotgun. "He also states that he told his mother to aim high over the police officers' heads," Mr. Woodburn said. Before speaking of the current charges, Mr. Jones told the jury about his client's background, which includes charges of abducting her triplets in Ontario. "Over the years, she may have taken action that is unconventional, but she is not a criminal," Mr. Jones said. On Oct. 14, 2000, just ahead of a court appearance in Ontario that Ms. VandenElsen feared would result in her access to her seven-year-old triplets being cut off, she fled with them. They were found in Mexico and the children were reunited with their father in January 2001. Ms. VandenElsen, charged with child abduction, successfully argued in court that taking off with the children was necessary to protect them from the emotional harm of being separated from her. But in August 2003, an Ontario court threw out her acquittal and ordered a new trial. That case is pending. In speaking of Ms. VandenElsen's care for her triplets, Mr. Jones called her "a supermom." At one point, Justice Robert Wright interrupted Mr. Jones and reminded him that he was to deliver an opening address and not a closing argument. "My Lord, I will be calling Ms. VandenElsen. We will rely on a defence of necessity," Mr. Jones replied. As well, Ms. VandenElsen will testify she feared someone would harm or take her new baby. So, less than a month after the girl's birth, she left Halifax, unaware that a Jan. 15, 2004, court order for temporary care of her child existed, her lawyer said. When police used a battering ram on the door of the Shirley Street house, Ms. VandenElsen was petrified about what might happen to her child, Mr. Jones said. "A shot was fired over the heads of the intruders," he said. "She will testify that she did not fire the gun, pick up a gun or load the ammunition. "Additionally, it will be her testimony that Lawrence Finck did not shoot the gun." The evidence, Mr. Jones told the jury, will show "that Carline VandenElsen was not an aggressor but rather she was the victim." "At the end of the day, Carline VandenElsen walked out of that house, Her baby was taken, and she has never seen it again." Mr. Finck's lawyer, Raymond Kuszelewski, told the jury that no Crown witnesses, including police officers, will be able to give them the entire story, which, he said, began well before the standoff and well before the baby was born. The case, Mr. Kuszelewski said, is all about how an order from a family court led to a standoff that resulted in eight criminal charges against Mr. Finck. The standoff ended when the couple emerged from the house carrying a stretcher bearing the body of Mr. Finck's mother. Ms. VandenElsen had the baby in a carrier on her chest, and Mr. Finck was carrying a loaded shotgun over his shoulder. During a subsequent search of the home, police seized two handguns, shotgun shells and live ammunition. The trial is scheduled for five weeks. source: Friday, March 18, 2005 Finck to go it alone Standoff suspect fires lawyer By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter Larry Finck is going to do it himself. On Thursday, Mr. Finck - co-accused with his wife, Carline VandenElsen, on eight charges stemming from an armed standoff with Halifax police last May - abruptly fired his lawyer. 
SCOTT DUNLOP Sheriff's deputies used metal detectors and searched those entering the Larry Finck trial at the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax on Thursday. When the jury entered the courtroom Thursday morning, Justice Robert Wright told the 12 members that Mr. Finck had decided to dismiss his counsel, Ray Kuszelewski. "An accused person has the legal right to represent themselves," Justice Wright said. "Mr. Finck chooses to exercise that right, and so it will be." Outside court, Mr. Kuszelewski said he and Mr. Finck had not always seen eye to eye. "Clearly, Mr. Finck is an independent-minded person and he has a particular view of this case, and that particular view fits into a world view that he has, and he wants to put that forward," Mr. Kuszelewski said. "And, he feels that the classic rules of the court are preventing him from doing that. And he feels that I'm part of that burden." But as an officer of the court, Mr. Kuszelewski said, he has an ethical obligation not to leave Mr. Finck in the lurch. Despite Mr. Finck's decision, Mr. Kuszelewski agreed to remain in the gallery of the courtroom and take notes in case Mr. Finck changes his mind. "So if at any point if he feels that he's out of his league, he can turn around to me and at least ask me a question. At the very least, I'll be able to answer his question or . . . attempt to," Mr. Kuszelewski said. "And if he decides at some point he'd rather that I was sitting at the counsel table and that I take an active role in his defence, then I'll do that." Ms. VandenElsen is represented by lawyer Burnley (Rocky) Jones. The standoff, at the home of Mr. Finck's mother, began in the early hours of May 19, after police attempted to enforce a Jan. 15, 2004, court order to place the couple's baby in the temporary care of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. During the standoff, Mr. Finck's mother, Mona Finck, died of natural causes inside her Shirley Street home. The seriousness of the 79-year-old woman's condition was revealed in court Thursday through testimony from her doctor and wiretapped telephone conversations police recorded during the 67-hour standoff. Two of the taped conversations were played for the jury. Dr. Donald Fay, Mrs. Finck's doctor since April 2003, testified that she had chronic illnesses that were quite severe, including a lung condition that obstructed her breathing. In 1986-87, she had quadruple bypass heart surgery. She also had peripheral vascular disease (narrowing of blood vessels in the legs or arms that restricts blood flow and causes pain) and arthritis. Dr. Fay had made two home visits to Mrs. Finck, in January and April 2004. His next contact with her was by telephone on May 20 during the standoff. "It was made very clear to me that I was not a negotiator," Dr. Fay recalled of his conversation with police, "and I would not be permitted to go inside of the house because of safety issues. "It wouldn't have been your usual house call." Dr. Fay told Crown attorney Rick Woodburn that he had no fear of going into the home. Police had called him there. Earlier on the tape, Det. Const. Tom Martin is heard speaking with the couple. Det. Const. Martin, the lead negotiator for Halifax Regional Police, first managed to contact Mrs. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck at 10:58 a.m. on May 20. Mrs. VandenElsen calmly told him that she was downstairs making applesauce. During that conversation, which lasted just over an hour, Mr. Finck and Mrs. VandenElsen - who knew they were being recorded - made many demands. Among those demands were that police intervene in their appeal of a child apprehension order and to be allowed contact with a lawyer, a doctor and two priests. They also wanted Aspirin and apples. When Mrs. Finck spoke to Dr. Fay on the phone at 11:19 a.m., her voice was fragile and she sounded very short of breath. "I'm just so extra tired," she told him. "And so weak, very weak. And last night, I ran a fever. Today is just weakness all over my body. So I don't know what's wrong." When the doctor asked her if it was just in the last day that she had felt this way, Mrs. Finck said it had been the last three days. "And I threw up last night and I threw up again this morning. . . . I have no energy whatsoever." When Dr. Fay asked Mrs. Finck what she would like to do right away for herself, she replied, "Well, I don't know, Dr. Fay. . . . I, I, I don't know," and repeated that she was extra tired. The taped conversations also revealed that Det. Const. Martin had tried to get Mr. Finck and Mrs. VandenElsen to bring the mother outside. The home was surrounded by armed officers at the time. The standoff ended on the evening of May 21 when the couple emerged from the house carrying a stretcher bearing the body of Mr. Finck's mother. Ms. VandenElsen had the baby in a carrier on her chest, and Mr. Finck was carrying a loaded shotgun over his shoulder. During a subsequent search of the home, police seized two handguns, shotgun shells and live ammunition. The Crown alleges Ms. VandenElsen fired a shot over the officers' heads during the standoff but that Mr. Finck was a party to the offence. source: Doctor testifies in standoff trial HALIFAX – A family doctor told a Halifax court Thursday about his involvement in an armed standoff last May, during which a 79-year-old woman died. Mona Finck was frail and sick as the standoff outside her Shirley Street home escalated. It started May 19 when police tried to enforce a child apprehension order.Larry Finck, Mona's son, and his wife Carline VandenElsen are on trial for eight charges relating to the standoff.Part of the evidence against them is a recorded phone conversation that paints a picture of what was going on inside the house. 
Larry Finck During the standoff, Donald Fay, Mona Finck's doctor, was asked by the family to make a house call to check on her. Police would not allow him in the house, which was surrounded by heavily armed officers.Fay spoke to family members from a police van on a special phone line May 20. He tried to persuade Larry Finck and VandenElsen to encourage Mona to leave the house, because the stress was not helping her chronic breathing disorder. VandenElsen asked him several times if he was afraid to come in. He said no. She told him that as a doctor he needed to be more independent and not take his orders from police.
Fay eventually spoke with Mona, who told him in a weak voice she needed a couple more days to see how she was feeling before she would leave.In the end, Mona Finck died of natural causes. VandenElsen and her son carried the 79-year old's body out of the house on a homemade stretcher May 21, ending the standoff. As the trial continues, Larry Finck has fired his lawyer, saying he can do a better job of defending himself. Source: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 Mountie describes standoff's dramatic end 'Risk . . . very high,' court hears By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter As Larry Finck and Carline VandenElsen sat barricaded inside a Shirley Street home for three days last May, six RCMP snipers armed with semi-automatic machine-guns hid themselves in neighbouring homes and on roofs where they could not be detected. Const. Wayne Knapman, a member of the RCMP emergency response team and one of the snipers, gave a play-by play Tuesday of the emotional takedown when he testified at the couple's Nova Scotia Supreme Court trial. They face eight charges stemming from the standoff. "The risk assessment, to me, was very high during this entire call," Const. Knapman testified under questioning from Mr. Finck, who is representing himself. Const. Knapman and other officers positioned themselves in, and on the roofs of, two homes across from 6161 Shirley St., where Mr. Finck, Ms. VandenElsen and their baby lived with Mr. Finck's mother. Const. Knapman said that his first indication of the risk was when he took up his sniper position and a shotgun blast was fired over his head through a window on the second floor of the Finck home. The shot was fired seconds after the emergency response team used a battering ram to try to break down the front door. The 67-hour standoff ended May 21 at 7:25 p.m., when the couple emerged from the home carrying the body of Mr. Finck's 79-year-old mother on a makeshift stretcher. The mother, Mona Finck, had died of natural causes. Ms. VandenElsen had the baby in a carrier on her chest, and Mr. Finck was carrying a loaded shotgun over his shoulder. With his machine-gun pointed at Mr. Finck, Const. Knapman identified himself as a police officer and told him to drop the gun. Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen walked about a block before a dozen police officers carrying drawn weapons surrounded them and forced them to the ground. "She had her arms wrapped around the baby with a tight grip," Const. Knapman said. "She would not release the baby." So Const. Knapman drove his thumb into the "fleshy area" of Ms. VandenElsen's shoulder for about 10 seconds until she loosened her grip. As officers struggled with Ms. VandenElsen, she cried, "Don't take my baby!" "Those three to four seconds were very chaotic, trying to get the baby from her," Const. Knapman said. With a knife, another officer wearing body armour cut the "Snugli" from Ms. VandenElsen's chest and carried the baby to an unmarked police car. "At this point, we're concerned that she (Ms. VandenElsen) hasn't been properly searched searched for weapons," Const. Knapman said. Still on the ground, Ms. VandenElsen, wouldn't comply with a police demand to release her arms from beneath her body, so one officer shocked her twice with a Taser gun, Const. Knapman said. "I've been Tasered, and it's painful but it last five seconds and it's over," Const. Knapman told Ms. VandenElsen's lawyer Burnley (Rocky) Jones. Const. Knapman acknowledged that he did not see Ms. VandenElsen with a weapon. When Mr. Finck asked the constable if he thinks use of the Taser is safe, the officer replied, "Definitely." Police had gone to the Finck house just after midnight May 19 to try to carry out a child apprehension order on behalf of the Children's Aid Society. Police had originally visited the home to remove the baby in January, but Ms. VandenElsen and the infant had disappeared. The trial continues today before Justice Robert Wright and a 12-member jury. Source: Wednesday, March 30, 2005 Pair made police uneasy, trial told VandenElsen spoke of right to bear arms, Finck warned wife 'would fight until death' By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter Some three months before the longest armed standoff in Halifax history last May, one police sergeant was so concerned for any officers who might encounter Carline VandenElsen that he issued a safety bulletin, a jury heard Tuesday. 
File Larry Finck nails a sign to the front of his mother's house during the third day of an armed standoff on Shirley Street in Halifax last year. Ms. VandenElsen, 42, and her husband, Larry Finck, 51, who barricaded themselves in a Shirley Street home for 67 hours, are being tried on eight charges stemming from the standoff with Halifax Regional Police. On Feb. 9, 2004, Sgt. Sean Auld issued the bulletin both nationally and internationally after receiving a telephone call from Mr. Finck. "As a direct result of what you relayed to me at that time, I had grave concerns for any officers that might come across your wife, and as a result of this grave concern, I issued an officer safety bulletin based on this," Sgt. Auld told Mr. Finck in Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax. "I related that you had stated that she (Ms. VandenElsen) had spoken to a lawyer in the United States and that this lawyer had stated that she had a constitutional right to bear arms," Sgt. Auld said. No such right exists in Canada. As well, Sgt. Auld testified, Mr. Finck - who is representing himself - told him that his wife "would fight until death." This initial concern may also explain why a police emergency response team armed with machine-guns showed up at the couple's door in the wee hours of May 19 with a battering ram. Six RCMP snipers also responded. Police were trying to enforce a Jan. 15, 2004, court order to place the couple's baby in the temporary care of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. On Jan. 16, when police initially arrived at the Shirley Street house to enforce the order, neither Ms. VandenElsen nor the baby could be found. After the disappearance, Sgt. Auld, the officer initially assigned to enforce the court order, put out a number of missing-persons alerts to police agencies nationally and internationally, and the alerts also reached Canada Customs and its U.S. counterpart. When Mr. Finck arrived at Halifax police headquarters on Feb. 26 to file a kidnapping complaint, Sgt. Auld testified, he was under the impression that Mr. Finck was there to provide information about the whereabouts of his wife and daughter. But in a videotaped interview played in court last week, Mr. Finck demanded police investigate allegations that Children's Aid, doctors, judges and lawyers were trying to kidnap his baby. Sgt. Auld didn't investigate the complaint because Mr. Finck's assertions "were certainly beyond belief." Under cross-examination, Sgt. Auld told Mr. Finck that he believed that Mr. Finck himself was involved in a conspiracy to abduct the child. "That was my opinion that day, that was my opinion on the 16th of January, and it's my opinion now," Sgt. Auld said. The standoff ended May 21 when the couple emerged from the house carrying a stretcher with the body of Mr. Finck's mother, who had died. She was known to have had heart problems. Ms. VandenElsen had the baby in a carrier, and Mr. Finck was carrying a loaded shotgun over his shoulder. The Crown alleges Ms. VandenElsen fired a shot over officers' heads at the beginning of the standoff on May 19 but that Mr. Finck was a party to the offence. During a search of the home after the standoff ended, police seized two other guns and ammunition. Wednesday, April 6, 2005 Protecting the kids VandenElsen says she lost respect for child welfare system, took action to help her children By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter 
PETER PARSONS / Staff Carline VandenElsen, walking towards a courtroom in Halifax on Tuesday, is awaiting a new trial in Ontario on charges of abducting her three older children after an acquittal was thrown out in 2003. Carline VandenElsen passionately told a jury Tuesday that her past experiences with Children's Aid in Ontario, which caused her to lose custody of her triplets, led her to flee Halifax in January 2004 out of fear that the same thing would happen to her and Larry Finck's new baby. Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck are being tried in Nova Scotia Supreme Court on eight charges stemming from a 67-hour armed standoff with Halifax police at a Shirley Street home last May. On top of firearms charges, the couple are accused of violating a court order by detaining and concealing their baby, who was to be turned over to the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. Ms. VandenElsen, who took the stand in her own defence Tuesday, told her lawyer, Burnley (Rocky) Jones, that she was aware "vicariously" through her husband that Children's Aid was the legal guardian of the baby. When asked if she had concealed the baby, Ms. VandenElsen, a former school teacher, replied: "I don't believe I concealed her, I believe I protected her." The couple have not seen their baby since last May 21. Also a former civil servant, Ms. VandenElsen testified she had never had any problems with the government until she became involved in family court proceedings in Ontario. "I was unaware of what I was up against until years later," she said of her five-year battle over the custody of her triplets that began in 1995. As a result, she said, she has "lost all respect for the government," which she views as a system rather than people. Ms. VandenElsen's and Mr. Finck's previous custody battles involve other children from previous marriages. Mr. Finck was convicted in 2000 and served prison time for abducting his four-year-old daughter from an Ontario reserve in 1999. And Ms. VandenElsen is awaiting a new trial in Ontario on charges of abducting her three older children after an acquittal was thrown out in 2003. On Oct. 14, 2000, just ahead of a court appearance that Ms. VandenElsen feared would result in loss of access to her then-seven-year-old triplets, she disappeared with them, first to Nova Scotia and then to Mexico. "I had to make a decision that I either had to walk away from them or walk away with them," Ms. VandenElsen testified Tuesday. "I knew the family court system - that process failed my children." The children were found and reunited with their father, Ms. VandenElsen's second husband, Craig Merkley, in January 2001. The triplets were conceived by in vitro fertilization. Ms. VandenElsen, charged with child abduction, successfully argued in court that taking off with the children was necessary to protect them from the emotional harm of being separated from her. But in August 2003, an Ontario Court of Appeal threw out her acquittal and ordered a new trial. At one point in her testimony Tuesday, Ms. VandenElsen broke down as she told the jury of one professional report she'd read about one of her sons tying a rope around his neck because he didn't want to live anymore. At the time, Ms. VandenElsen's access to her triplets had been reduced to two 10-hour visits per month, she said. On Tuesday, Justice Robert Wright ruled Ms. VandenElsen's 2002 book America's Most Wanted Mother could not be entered as an exhibit by the defence. Ms. VandenElsen had 12 copies on hand for each of the jurors. In the Halifax case, police first went to the Shirley Street house just after midnight last May 19 to try to carry out a court order to place the couple's baby in the temporary care of Children's Aid. They were denied entry and after a second attempt was made, a shot was fired from the house, sparking the standoff. Police had gone to the home in January to remove the baby but Ms. VandenElsen and the infant had disappeared. Outside the courtroom, Mr. Jones said he was trying to establish that Ms. VandenElsen is a caring and traditional mother who completely believed in the system until things started to go awry. "It's from that point, so I'm showing that with the things that happened to her, she becomes very disillusioned in the system and how it works," he said. "She ended up losing her triplets . . . and that forms the basis of her beliefs." Ms. VandenElsen will attempt to use the defence that it was necessary for her to flee Halifax because she feared someone would harm or take her new baby. "Basically, in order to get to any necessity, you would have to show that your beliefs are grounded in reasonable facts," Mr. Jones told reporters. He said necessity is an extremely difficult defence, which the judge will first have to determine can be used in this particular case. "So, it's important for Ms. VandenElsen, from a legal standpoint, that the foundation for that defence be laid in fact and in evidence," Mr. Jones said. Ms. VandenElsen's testimony continues today. Source: Halifax Herald Mother-in-law held shotgun: VandenElsen Last Updated Apr 7 2005 09:15 AM ADT HALIFAX – The woman on trial for shooting at police and hiding her baby has suggested her 79-year-old mother-in-law could have fired a gun. Carline VandenElsen, along with her husband Larry Finck, is being tried on eight charges stemming from the armed standoff with police last May. Early in the morning of May 19, police officers showed up a house on Shirley Street to enforce a child protection order. A shot was fired and a three-day standoff ensued. VandenElsen testified Wednesday she was with her mother-in-law, Mona Finck, on the main floor when police were trying to come through the front door. There was an extremely loud noise and the door vibrated, VandenElsen said. As she turned around, "Mona had one of those guns in her hand. "When she heard glass shattering, VandenElsen said she spontaneously grabbed one end of the gun and grabbed Finck's hand. She said she didn't know the gun went off. Mona Finck died of natural causes during the standoff. The trial is expected to continue throughout next week. Source: Friday, April 8, 2005 VandenElsen describes distrust of foster system Children in 'grave peril,' woman tells trial court By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter 
File An RCMP emergency response team member rushes a baby to a waiting car following the conclusion of the longest standoff in the city's history last May. With no idea where her baby girl is, Carline VandenElsen has no faith in Nova Scotia's foster care or child welfare system, a court heard Thursday. "I believe that children in foster care are in grave peril," Ms. VandenElsen told her husband Larry Finck under cross-examination at Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax. Last May 21, the couple's baby, then five months old, was taken into the temporary custody of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax at the end of a three-day standoff between the couple and Halifax Regional Police. Months earlier, a judge had ruled the child needed protection. Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck are on trial on eight charges stemming from the standoff. Since her arrest, Ms. VandenElsen has written several letters to children's aid and other government officials in a futile attempt to find out her baby's whereabouts. "I don't have any knowledge whatsoever where my baby is, who is caring for her," Ms. VandenElsen testified. As a result, Ms. VandenElsen said she believes "there is significant risk of harm to the child." "I don't think I'm any different than any other mother," Ms. VandenElsen said tearfully. "If you don't have your baby with you . . . you are going to wake up every morning and wonder about that baby. "I don't care who you are, I don't care if you are on the stand, if you are a defendant, if you are a parent in the PTA, you're always going to wonder where your baby is." Ms. VandenElsen told the jury she took responsibility when she had the baby. And her decision to carry through with the pregnancy was a significant one. "I wanted an abortion because that's how afraid I was," she said, adding neither she nor Mr. Finck believe in the procedure. "That's the reason why we went through with it. We thought we could start a family again. We thought we could get away from this mess and they would leave us alone. "It doesn't work that way." Before the baby was born in December 2003, Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck were involved in lengthy child custody and abduction cases. Ms. VandenElsen awaits trial in Ontario on charges of abducting her triplets from a previous marriage after an acquittal was thrown out in 2003. Mr. Finck was convicted and served time for abducting his four-year-old daughter from an Ontario native reserve in 1999. With tears streaming down her face and looking directly at the four-woman, eight-man jury, Ms. VandenElsen said that after she read numerous other court cases she "developed more fear than I had before because that determined for me that even the judiciary in this country will not protect children." This case is not just about her baby, she added. "Yes, I have concerns about her as a mother, but I have bigger concerns about your children, your grandchildren," Ms. VandenElsen passionately told the jury, her voice raised. At one point, Mr. Finck produced a photograph of a piece of their baby's "snuggly" carrier and a soother. Ms. VandenElsen said the photo was taken after the baby was seized from her at the standoff scene. Police had used scissors to free the baby from the carrier. The photo was shown to the jury. Ms. VandenElsen's testimony continues Monday. Source: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 VandenElsen: Baby being 'warehoused' Judge admonishes accused in standoff By SHERRI BORDEN COLLEY / Court Reporter 
File Carline VandenElsen walks to a relative's vehicle after being released on bail in July. She and her husband Larry Finck face eight charges in an incident last May when police took their three-month-old baby from their Halifax home. Carline VandenElsen told a jury Monday that she believes her baby has either been adopted or sold and has been moved to the United States. Testifying for a fourth day at the criminal trial of her and her husband, Larry Finck, in Halifax, Ms. VandenElsen said that as late as last Thursday, she'd heard that her child "is being warehoused in a home with several other children." No documentation was put before the Nova Scotia Supreme Court jury to back up Ms. VandenElsen's claims. The couple face eight charges, some of them weapons-related. Last May 21, the couple's baby was taken into the temporary custody of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax at the end of a three-day standoff on Shirley Street between the couple and Halifax Regional Police. A court first ordered the child placed in temporary care on Jan. 15, 2004. But when police went to 6161 Shirley St. that day to get the baby, Ms. VandenElsen and the baby had disappeared. In Monday's testimony, Ms. VandenElsen, who was being cross-examined by her husband, offered the court details of how she was able to flee Halifax with the baby unnoticed in the early hours of Jan. 15. Before that, she had contacted a person in Ontario who was part of an organization sometimes called the "Underground Railroad." "We discussed numerous options," Ms. VandenElsen testified. The group, she said, help move families out of the country or from province to province without their being spotted. Ms. VandenElsen said her involvement with the group didn't start until her baby was born, in December 2003. "Is it not true that this Underground Railroad has been formed in Canada to stop the killing of the children at the hand of the children's aid societies," Mr. Finck, who is representing himself, asked his wife. "Mr. Finck . . . look . . . you're assuming a statement of facts that are untrue and are undoubtedly very much in controversy," Justice Robert Wright said. "So it's not a proper question. "You're almost building evidence into your question." On Jan. 15, the day Ms. VandenElsen fled Halifax, a Halifax person - whom she wouldn't identify in court - drove her and the baby to New Brunswick, she said. From there, she took a bus to Montreal and then on to Western Canada. Ms. VandenElsen returned to Halifax in mid-February 2004 but kept a low profile so she wouldn't be recognized. In Monday's testimony, Ms. VandenElsen spoke of the lasting physical and psychological harm she suffered from the 67-hour standoff with police. It ended the evening of May 21, when the couple emerged from the home carrying the body of Mr. Finck's 79-year-old mother on a makeshift stretcher. Mona Finck, who had a history of heart trouble, had died during the standoff. Ms. VandenElsen had the baby in a carrier on her chest, and Mr. Finck was carrying a loaded shotgun over his shoulder. A dozen police officers, their weapons drawn, surrounded the couple and forced them to the ground. Another officer wearing body armour cut the baby carrier from Ms. VandenElsen's chest and carried the baby to an unmarked police car. Because Ms. VandenElsen wouldn't comply with a police demand to release her arms from beneath her body, one officer shocked her right buttock twice with a Taser gun. The Taser shocks, Ms. VandenElsen testified Monday, left her with an infection in her buttock, a scar and numbing on both sides of her legs. "I had problems with my memory. I'm not sure if it was because of the Taser gun or because of the events that traumatized me," Ms. VandenElsen told the court. During the standoff, six RCMP snipers armed with machine guns, and other officers positioned themselves in, and on the roofs of, two homes across from 6161 Shirley St., where Mr. Finck, Ms. VandenElsen and their baby lived with Mr. Finck's mother. A shot was fired from within the house seconds after an emergency response team used a battering ram to try to break down the front door early in the standoff. Crown attorney Len MacKay will continue to cross-examine Ms. VandenElsen today. Source: Tuesday, April 19, 2005 Finck blames system By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter 
File Larry Finck and his wife are being tried on eight charges each stemming from a standoff with police last May. Speaking in a soft, sometimes barely audible voice Monday, Larry Finck told a Nova Scotia Supreme Court jury the story of his life, stressing his belief in himself and how the system has conspired against him. The 51-year-old Halifax man and his wife, Carline VandenElsen, 42, are being tried on eight charges each stemming from a standoff with police last May. "I believe my upbringing damaged me," Mr. Finck said as he began presenting his case from the witness box. A plumber by trade, Mr. Finck is acting as his own lawyer. Wearing prison-issue clothes, a navy sweatshirt and green work pants that hung loosely on his slim frame, the 51-year-old with his overgrown greying dark hair and beard addressed the 12-member jury. "I'd like to apologize first of all for my appearance. It's out of my control," he said. "For my attire, it's out of my control, and for the delay, it's out of my control." Mr. Finck described his mother's undying support and his father's strict discipline. "You got one shot for doing it and four more for lying about it," Mr. Finck said, recalling his father's method of punishment. He finished only Grade 10 but his dreams of becoming a hockey star carried him on to play in Maple Leaf Gardens and in Europe, he said. Mr. Finck played junior hockey in St. Catharines, Ont., and the Pittsburgh Penguins drafted him in 1974, although he never played in the NHL. Throughout the day, Justice Robert Wright urged him to speed up. "If you are taking this much time for this stuff, what are we in for when you get to the relevant stuff?" the judge said. Mr. Finck said he got married, had children, held a number of jobs and eventually trained as a plumber. His marriage fell apart and he told the court about a couple of relationships he had and then he fathered another daughter in Ontario. It wasn't until the girl's mother died that Mr. Finck's battles with the system began. Although he said most people within the system - medical, legal, child welfare and political - are "good people," he ran afoul of a few who were not. "They isolate you, once you start taking the system on," Mr. Finck said. He told the jury he began studying law and once he felt he had enough education, "he began using the system on itself," he said. "This is when the war started. . . . and I got ready for it." He said he charged lawyers criminally and launched lawsuits and appeals. "They never quit with Louis Riel . . . and this is the outfit that I took on," he said, referring to the Law Society of Upper Canada. Mr. Finck eventually lost all access to that daughter, the court was told. He said he had moved into "protection mode . . . and was going to attack from all angles." He also started a business called Keep an Eye on your Scumbag Lawyer, from which he offers counselling to people having difficulties with the system, particularly in the field of family law. The system then really began to fight back, as Mr. Finck said he predicted. He said he was hauled in for psychiatric evaluations and allegedly for having committed crimes of violence. He told the jury how he sought out Ms. VandenElsen after learning of her own custody battles for her triplets and how he began to help her with her legal issues. They eventually married. The couple were arrested last spring. For three days, they were barricaded with their baby and Mr. Finck's elderly mother Mona inside 6161 Shirley St. when they chose to defy a child apprehension order. The standoff ended the evening of May 21 when the couple emerged from the home carrying the body of Mona Finck, 79, on a makeshift stretcher. The trial continues today. Source: Thursday, April 21, 2005 Finck testifies he repaid lies with lies Shirley Street siege trial continues By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter Larry Finck says he was lying when he confessed that he told his mother to aim high when firing her gun during a police standoff in Halifax. The 51-year-old Halifax man and his wife Carline VandenElsen, 42, are being tried on charges stemming from the three-day standoff on Shirley Street last May. Under cross-examination by the Crown, Mr. Finck said he was bartering "like trash talk on the ice." After his arrest May 21, Mr. Finck was interrogated by police. "They were lying to me and I was lying back," he told Crown attorney Rick Woodburn. The cross-examination began testily when Mr. Woodburn asked Mr. Finck to state his criminal record, which includes abduction in contravention of a child custody order, drug possession and bootlegging. "I'm not going to answer any more about my criminal record until I get a chance to explain," Mr. Finck said. At one point he yelled at the judge to let him elaborate or "you can end this trial now and throw me in prison." He reiterated his earlier testimony that he is not a gun person and that his mother, Mona Finck, taught him how to open the shotgun that was fired from the house during the standoff. Mrs. Finck died of natural causes during the siege. Much of Wednesday morning was devoted to discussions held in the jury's absence. When the jurors returned, Ms. VandenElsen announced she would fire her lawyer Burnley (Rocky) Jones. "We both came to an understanding as to our roles," Ms. VandenElsen told the court. "He finished questioning in my defence. However, there are a few questions I want to ask, not only in my own defence but also in my child's defence." At that point Justice Robert Wright cut Ms. VandenElsen off and excused the jury again. When they were brought back, Justice Wright said Mr. Jones would continue representing Ms. VandenElsen. Under questioning by Mr. Jones, Mr. Finck testified he believes he has a greater responsibility to his child and Canadian children than to authorities. He also described how his wife has changed since becoming pregnant with their daughter. "She's drawn. She's lost 30, 35, 40 pounds. Her colour has changed. "I could probably walk by her on the street and not recognize her," he said in describing how different she now looks. The trial continues today. Source: Halifax Herald April 26, 2005 Explosive testimony Finck says he may have escaped if he had an automatic weapon By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter If he had had automatic weapons instead of his uncle's old rabbit-hunting shotgun, Larry Finck and his family may have escaped the country, he told a Nova Scotia Supreme Court jury Monday. Mr. Finck and his wife, Carline VandenElsen, are on trial for charges stemming from a three-day standoff with Halifax Regional Police last spring. Source: April 28, 2005 VandenElsen questions cop Detailed queries test judge's patience A woman charged in an armed standoff with police last spring spent most of Wednesday questioning a police officer about the handling of an earlier investigation and police paperwork. Carline VandenElsen, 42, and her husband Larry Finck, 51, are both representing themselves in a jury trial that has run for nearly two months in Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax. Source: Halifax Herald Friday, April 29, 2005 Doctor cries on stand A Halifax doctor cried Thursday as she told a jury she felt she had brought trouble on a Halifax couple involved in an armed standoff with police last spring. "I felt I had opened the biggest can of worms and the matter was not going to be put to rest," an emotional Dr. Dawn Edgar said. Larry Finck, 51, and his wife, Carline VandenElsen, 42, are on trial in Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax on eight charges, including weapons offences and obstruction. Dr. Edgar testified that an old friend, Mr. Finck's sister, contacted her in December to ask if she would treat Ms. VandenElsen, who was moving to Halifax from Ontario. On Dec. 23, 2003, with Dr. Edgar's assistance, Ms. VandenElsen delivered a healthy baby. But on Christmas Eve, Dr. Edgar phoned Children's Aid because she feared the baby might not be safe. "It was a combination of things" that led her to make the call, she testified. Ms. VandenElsen wanted a home birth, and when the doctor refused, she insisted on leaving the hospital as soon as possible. Also, the couple was vague about their other children staying with relatives. But Dr. Edgar was most concerned that a nurse had told her the couple had encountered difficulties with Children's Aid in Ontario. "She had heard the story that you had kidnapped your children, thrown them in the back of your car and drove them over the Mexican border," Dr. Edgar told Ms. VandenElsen in the courtroom. But after observing the couple with their baby on followup visits and no longer having any worries for the baby's safety, Dr. Edgar called Children's Aid again. The society worker asked whether the doctor had concerns for the parents' mental health or the care of the baby. Dr. Edgar testified she told the official she had no concerns. And then the official told her about outstanding family court issues in Ontario. The couple are representing themselves in court. After several more of Ms. VandenElsen's questions to the doctor were overruled, Mr. Finck jumped to his feet to object and then refused Justice Robert Wright's order to sit down. "I'm removing myself. I'm done," he yelled as sheriff's deputies led him from court. With her husband gone, Ms. VandenElsen refused to continue questioning the witness. Justice Wright eventually told the doctor she was free to leave. Earlier in the day, against Justice Wright's advice, Mr. Finck entered his file from a national police information database into evidence. "It's to your own peril, sir," Justice Wright warned Mr. Finck. "It's so outrageous and sick that I think the jury has a right to see it," Mr. Finck said, explaining that he wanted jurors to see how police can damage people's reputations. Mr. Finck had Det. Const. Peter Webber read portions of the document to the jury. Officers in Strathroy, Ont., had entered warnings that Mr. Finck might be mentally unstable, violent and carrying a contagious disease. Another entry from police in London, Ont., warned of violence and family violence. Mr. Finck asked Det. Const. Webber whether he has an obligation to correct misinformation on the countrywide system. The officer explained that it is up to the police department that enters the information to correct it. "Did you ever come to me and ask me whether these are true?" Mr. Finck said. The officer said he had not. Mr. Finck began to ask another question about what the officer may have seen when the Crown cut him off. "I'm not really sure if he wants to go down this road," Rick Woodburn interjected. "It's a suggestion. I'm trying to take the high road here." Det. Const. Webber said he uses information on the database as a guide. He said he formed his own opinions after interacting with Mr. Finck. The battering ram that police used to try to break down the door of 6161 Shirley St., where Mr. Finck, his wife, baby and mother were barricaded for three days, was also entered into evidence. Mr. Woodburn appeared to handle the ram with ease, carrying it with one hand and swinging it up onto the floor of the witness box where it landed with a heavy thump. Mr. Finck told the court last week that when the ram was slammed into the door, the entire house shook. The trial will continue on Monday. Source: Tuesday May 3, 2005 Finck, VandenElsen trial postponed for the dayJurors hearing the case against a Halifax couple involved in an armed standoff last May got a day off Monday. The trial, in its ninth week, was postponed until at least today due to illness. The husband of one of the jurors suffered a heart attack last weekend, court was told. Source: Wednesday May 4, 2005 Finck closes defence case in Halifax standoff trial A Halifax father charged in a three-day armed standoff with police last spring has closed his case. After two weeks of presenting evidence, Larry Finck questioned his last witness Tuesday morning. Source: Thursday, May 5, 2005 VandenElsen: 'We have no defence' By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter "We have no defence," Carline VandenElsen told a Nova Scotia Supreme Court jury on Wednesday. The 42-year-old mother and her husband, Larry Finck, 52, are on trial in Halifax on charges of abduction in contravention of a custody order, obstruction and six weapons-related offences stemming from an armed standoff in the city a year ago this month. 
Carline VandenElsen
Larry Finck
The couple, who are representing themselves, presented their final arguments to the jury on Wednesday. "You don't have the full picture," Ms. VandenElsen said. As she began to tell the jury that defence evidence has been banned, Justice Robert Wright stopped her and chided her for referring to evidence that has been overruled. Throughout her submission, Ms. VandenElsen read from notes that were written on the backs of photocopies of family photos that she had previously been denied permission to show the jury. Referring to herself and her husband as "Penniless parents against state authorities and lawyers," Ms. VandenElsen explained that what they did was part of parents' natural role in society and in nature. "The parents are facing years of imprisonment for doing something that's natural - protecting their offspring," she said. She then recited a long list of words and definitions for the jury. The words included tyranny, relevant, oppression, imminent, lawful, lynch law and slander. When Justice Wright reminded her that closing arguments are not a platform for making political statements, she told the jury that "a political opinion does not make a parent guilty." She defended her husband, saying that just because he's arrogant and opinionated doesn't mean he's a criminal. "He's got a problem with the way children are being treated in this country," Ms. VandenElsen said. Mr. Finck's outbursts and his bad behaviour in court are because he has been in jail and is under pressure and in emotional pain, she said. Neither she nor her husband fired the shotgun at Halifax Regional Police on the night the standoff began, she said. She reminded the court that the judge has told the couple many times that police and the legal system are not on trial. "That doesn't mean that what they did and what their approach was wasn't wrong," Ms. VandenElsen argued. In his closing address, Mr. Finck complained that the lawyer he fired early on in the trial had made several mistakes. Those mistakes included allowing most wiretap transcripts to be admitted into evidence and agreeing that only three adults were inside 6161 Shirley St. during the standoff and that the shotgun was not registered. "Now you understand why I'm representing myself," Mr. Finck said. He continued to blame the Children's Aid Society for launching a hunt for him and his wife. Mr. Finck told the court that the actions of the police perpetuated the violence. On the day the standoff began, police were on a covert mission, he said. They knocked on the Fincks' door late at night because they didn't want the public to see. Mr. Finck also attacked police for the way evidence was gathered, saying it had been contaminated. He also said many officers lied and other cops swore to their fellow officers' lies. And he accused the Crown and police of tailoring evidence. As an example, Mr. Finck held the battering ram police used in an attempt to break down the door of 6161 Shirley St. The Crown maintains it was handled by one officer. Mr. Finck insists that is a lie. On Wednesday, he picked up the device to show the jury how awkward he believes it is for one man to swing. Calling it a "two-man ram," Mr. Finck had a sheriff's deputy hold the opposite side of the ram. "It practically works itself (with two men holding it)," Mr. Finck said, encouraging the jurors to try it out during their deliberations. He reiterated that his mother Mona, who died of natural causes during the standoff at age 79, was in charge of the house during the siege and that officers on the scene knew it. Two officers, including the police negotiator, grew up in the neighbourhood in the '60s, Mr. Finck said. "There wasn't anybody in the neighbourhood who didn't know who was in control (at the Finck home) - the parents," he said. "That was a rough working-class neighbourhood." Mr. Finck also compared himself to several famous leaders during times of political change - Polish Solidarity union head Lech Walesa, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and Nelson Mandela. "I don't feel bad, it's only been 10 years," Mr. Finck said, referring to his ongoing battles in family court. "It took Nelson Mandela 30 years to end apartheid." He also spoke to the jury about his personality in court. "I'm crass. I'm an in-your-face kind of person," he said. "There's a distinction between being that kind of person and a criminal." The Crown will present its final arguments today. Justice Wright is expected to deliver the charge to the jury Tuesday morning. Friday, May 6, 2005 No 'gun-toting granny' By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter Once again a Supreme Court jury heard some of the last words uttered by Mona Finck, a dying grandmother whose son and daughter-in-law claim held police at bay for three days in an armed standoff last spring. Larry Finck, 51, and his wife, Carline VandenElsen, 42, face eight charges, including concealing their baby in contravention of a child custody order, obstruction, firing a shotgun at police to prevent being arrested and five other weapons-related offences. "I'm tired and so weak, very weak. Last night I ran a fever. Today, there's weakness all over my body," Ms. Finck told her doctor in a conversation which was recorded by police the day before she died. Her son listened to the recording Thursday without showing any sign of emotion. Ms. Finck died of natural causes just over a year ago, about seven hours before the siege ended. She told the doctor she hadn't been able to keep food down. Shortly after she can be heard throwing up and coughing. "Does she sound like a wild woman ready to go to war with police?" Crown attorney Rick Woodburn asked the jury. "She's certainly not the gun-toting granny described by Mr. Finck." Both Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen testified that the 79-year-old woman fired the gun to scare off officers who were trying to break down a barricaded door at 6161 Shirley St. Mr. Woodburn said the jury has two main issues to decide: who fired the gun and did the couple know about the child apprehension order. The best evidence disproving the couple's story that Mrs. Finck fired the gun comes from statements made by Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen, the Crown said. Mr. Finck told police that his mother was in bed when police used the battering ram. "You almost gave her a heart attack," Mr. Woodburn quoted Mr. Finck. Ms. VandenElsen also told Mrs. Finck's doctor that Mona was in her bed when police tried to break down the door. "Ms. VandenElsen fired the gun and he was party to it," Mr. Woodburn said. Officers who were at the door when the shot was fired testified they saw a woman in a pink top, like the one Ms. VandenElsen had been wearing earlier that day, standing at the door. Mr. Finck has also testified to loading and unloading the gun in the weeks leading up to the standoff. "They were party to everything going on in the house. . . . You can't separate one from the other," Mr. Woodburn said. Mr. Finck knew all about the child apprehension order because he was in court when it was issued. That same day Ms. VandenElsen disappeared with their baby. Even if it was a coincidence that Ms. VandenElsen left with her baby before she found out about the order, it is not believable that after she returned home in mid-February that she didn't know about the order, Mr. Woodburn argued. The Crown told the jury they do know that Ms. VandenElsen was aware of the order during the standoff. He quoted from wiretap evidence from a conversation between a police negotiator and Ms. VandenElsen during which she discusses the order. Throughout the trial, both Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen have stated that the system - including judiciary, child welfare agencies and police - was out to get them. "Even if you accept their grand conspiracy theory, the Crown submits it still doesn't overcome our case," Mr. Woodburn said. Justice Robert Wright will charge the jury Tuesday and deliberations are expected to begin that afternoon. Wednesday, May 11, 2005 Finck jury sequestered By DAVENE JEFFREY / Staff Reporter A jury is now deliberating on the guilt or innocence of a Halifax couple charged in a three-day armed standoff last May. 
Christian Laforce / Staff Carline VandenElsen stands outside Family Court in Halifax last November. Ms. VandenElsen and her husband Larry Finck are awaiting a verdict in their trial stemming from a siege on Shirley Street in Halifax. Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck face eight criminal charges including abduction and obstruction in connection with the siege on Shirley Street. Justice Robert Wright spent most of Tuesday instructing jurors on the points of law they must consider. Shortly before 6 p.m., the judge said in court he'd received questions from the jury seeking clarification on two issues. "It's been a long day for us all," Justice Wright told the jurors. "In the morning . . . you will be asked to come in and I will give you the appropriate supplementary instruction." He sequestered them for the night with orders not to have access to such news-delivering items as television, radio, the Internet and cellphones. Two weeks ago one of the jurors, Christopher Pettipas, was nearly dismissed when a defence lawyer reported what appears to have been a case of jury tampering. Burnley (Rocky) Jones, who has since been fired by Ms. VandenElsen, told the court his office had been contacted by a woman who claimed Mr. Pettipas and his wife had driven to 6161 Shirley St. to do their own investigation. The caller claimed the juror had already decided Mr. Finck is guilty. Under questioning by Justice Wright, Mr. Pettipas denied the allegation, saying his sister made up the story to seek revenge over a car deal the couple had struck with a niece and then reneged on. Despite protests by Mr. Finck that the jury was biased, Justice Wright said he believed Mr. Pettipas and let him stay on the jury. Halifax police are investigating the incident. After the jury was excused Tuesday afternoon, Mr. Finck, 51, launched more objections to Justice Wright's work, theatrics that have punctuated the trial. "It's the most disgusting performance I have heard from the bench," Mr. Finck yelled. "One more tirade and rant like that and you will forfeit your right to speak," the judge warned. Moments later Mr. Finck was ordered to sit down. Ms. VandenElsen, 42, was also cut short when she challenged the judge, saying: "Is there a reason that you are speaking to me in that tone?" Just over a year ago, Mr. Finck was diagnosed with having a delusional disorder of the persecutory type and mixed Cluster B personality disorder, meaning he is narcissistic, anti-social and has histrionic personality traits. The diagnosis was by Dr. Robert Pottle, a psychiatrist at the East Coast Forensic Psychiatric Hospital, where Mr. Finck was sent for assessment following the standoff. "The accused is a narcissistic, histrionic individual with an inflated opinion of his legal and intellectual abilities. He exhibited violent behaviour during the period of this assessment, which is consistent with other indications of anti-social personality traits in the Crown file. There is evidence of an anger management problem, reckless disregard for the safety of others, and impaired ability to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others," Dr. Pottle wrote. During the assessment Mr. Finck showed "no visible evidence of significant distress when speaking of his mother's death during the standoff or separation from his youngest child." A similar lack of visible emotion about his mother and baby was also apparent during the nine-week trial. Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen are charged with obstruction, abducting their baby in contravention of a child custody order, discharging a shotgun at police to avoid arrest and five other weapons offences. "It's been a long road for us," Crown attorney Rick Woodburn said outside court Tuesday. The key elements the jury must decide are the identity of the shooter and whether the couple abducted their baby, Mr. Woodburn told reporters. The Crown maintains Ms. VandenElsen fired a shotgun blast that came within 10 to 15 centimetres of a police officer's head and that Mr. Finck was party to it. The couple have both testified Mr. Finck's ailing mother Mona Finck fired the gun. Mrs. Finck died during their siege. Three court orders were issued between January and March of last year giving custody of the couple's baby to Family and Children's Services. The jury must now consider whether each knew about the orders and intentionally kept the baby from authorities. Source: The following is from the Toronto Globe and Mail: Judge's instructions to jury spark outburst in N.S. standoff trial By MICHAEL TUTTON Wednesday, May 11, 2005 Page A8 Canadian Press HALIFAX -- The trial of a couple facing charges after a 67-hour armed standoff with Halifax police last spring produced angry outbursts yesterday from both accused. The man, 51, and his wife, 42, face eight charges including hiding their baby in contravention of a child-custody order, and firing a shotgun at four police officers. The incident began after police attempted to enforce a Jan. 15, 2004, court order to place the couple's baby in the temporary care of the Children's Aid Society of Halifax. During the standoff last May at the home owned by the man's mother, the older woman -- who had heart problems -- died of natural causes. Some news media have withheld the names of the accused because the case involves a child-apprehension order. Yesterday, arguments in the nine-week-long trial in the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia ended with instructions to the jury by Mr. Justice Robert Wright. However, just minutes after the jury had left to begin deliberations, the father, who is representing himself, called Judge Wright's instructions to the jury "disgusting" and one-sided. The judge ordered the man, who has made frequent outbursts during the trial, to stop "his tirade" and warned him he could be cited for contempt of court. After several minutes, and several warnings, he cut the man's criticisms off. The man's wife then called the judge's jury instructions "despicable" before she was also told to sit down. In his instructions to the jury, Judge Wright had urged the eight men and four women not to become caught up in the couple's critique of the Children's Aid Society. "This case is not about the adjudication or consideration of the political or social causes we've heard so much about from the defence," he said. "Your mandate is to decide whether [the couple] are guilty or not guilty of each of the eight counts in the indictment according to the criminal laws of this country." During the trial, which started March 9, both the woman and the man fired their lawyers and presented much of their own defence. At times, the couple described themselves as penniless parents attempting to take on powerful and corrupt state agencies. Throughout her closing submission, the mother of the infant read from notes that were written on the backs of photocopies of family photos that she had previously been denied permission to show the jury. In her closing arguments, she said that what they did was part of parents' natural role in society and in nature. "The parents are facing years of imprisonment for doing something that's natural -- protecting their offspring." During the trial, the man blamed the Children's Aid Society for the incident. He also had compared himself to several famous leaders during times of political change, including Polish Solidarity union head Lech Walesa, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and Nelson Mandela. During his five-hour charge to the jury, Judge Wright painstakingly laid out the evidence on each count presented during the trial. On the abduction charges, he noted that the woman had admitted that after she was served with the court order giving the Children's Aid Society temporary custody of the infant, she left the province and had stated she planned to leave the country. The judge also outlined the Crown's evidence on the firearms charges, emphasizing that the key point for the jurors to determine was who fired the 12-gauge shotgun. The couple had argued that the man's mother, a frail, 77-pound (35-kilogram) woman, had fired the shotgun as police attempted to batter down the door. However, Judge Wright noted police testimony that they saw one woman standing in the doorway when the shot was fired, and her clothing matched that of the younger woman. Source: Standoff couple guilty on most charges Last updated May 12 2005 06:01 PM ADT HALIFAX -- A husband and wife have been convicted of several charges relating to an armed standoff with police in Halifax last May. After deliberating for two days, a jury found Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck guilty of obstructing a police order and contravening a court order to turn their infant daughter over to child protection authorities. The jury also found VandenElsen fired the shotgun on May 19, which led to the three-day standoff at Finck's home on Shirley Street. That charge has a minimum sentence of one year. VandenElsen has been taken into custody because she's considered a flight risk. The jury couldn't reach a decision on the more serious charge of whether VandenElsen fired the gun with the intent to prevent arrest. There also was no decision on whether Finck was guilty of a number of charges relating to helping his wife use the firearm, or aiding and abetting. The Crown is considering its options where no verdict has been returned. Finck and VandenElsen will be back in court Friday to argue that all charges should be stayed because authorities entrapped them. Source:
Friday, May 13, 2005
Standoff verdict split By DAVENE JEFFREY Staff Reporter and KRISTEN LIPSCOMBE A Halifax jury found Carline VandenElsen and Larry Finck guilty of several charges in a three-day armed standoff a year ago with police who came to enforce a child custody order. The Halifax couple were convicted Thursday afternoon in Nova Scotia Supreme Court of obstruction, abduction in contravention of a child custody order, possession of a shotgun dangerous to the public peace and possessing the shotgun without a licence. Ms. VandenElsen was also convicted of three other weapons offences, including using a shotgun to commit an indictable offence, which carries a minimum sentence of a year in jail. After a nine-week trial and two days of deliberations, the jury could not reach a unanimous decision on the most serious charge the couple faced - shooting at police to avoid arrest. In Mr. Finck's case, the jury also did not reach a verdict on charges of using a firearm while committing an indictable offence and two other weapons offences. In total, the jury found Ms. VandenElsen, 42, guilty of seven of eight charges and Mr. Finck, 52, guilty of four of eight. No verdict was reached on the five remaining charges. "There is not a chance that we will be able to agree," the jury said in a note Justice Robert Wright read in court. Crown attorney Rick Woodburn told reporters outside the courtroom that "they seemed to be split on whether the shots were actually fired at police." The Crown alleged that Mr. Finck was an accessory to Ms. VandenElsen, who they believe fired the shotgun as police tried to break down the front door of 6161 Shirley St. at the beginning of the standoff. "They seemed to be hung up on whether he knew specifically that she was going to fire the gun," Mr. Woodburn speculated. In court, Mr. Finck asked for each juror to state separately whether he or she agreed with the verdicts, and one by one the 12 jurors stood up to state their agreement on all eight charges against the couple. "That is the right of every accused," the judge told the courtroom about Mr. Finck's request. Mr. Finck leaned over and whispered into his wife's ear as each juror stated his or her decision on each charge. Throughout the trial, Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen claimed that his mother, who died of natural causes on the last day of the standoff, had fired the gun and was in control of the house during the siege. "In essence, they (the jury) cleared the mother of anything," Mr. Woodburn told reporters. The couple both fired their lawyers during the trial and presented much of their own defence. Since the trial began March 9, they have argued that they have been persecuted by uncaring state authorities who unjustly wanted to seize their baby. Justice Wright instructed the jury not to get caught up in any social or political statements the couple made. When he reminded Ms. VandenElsen that her closing argument was not a platform for making political statements, she told the jury that "a political opinion does not make a parent guilty." The standoff began shortly after midnight on the morning of May 19 last year when police tried to enforce a court order to place the couple's infant daughter in the temporary care of the Children's Aid Society. Police used a battering ram to try to break down the barricaded front door and then a shotgun blast came from a window. Police then evacuated and sealed off the quiet neighbourhood. The couple stayed in the house, which belonged to Mr. Finck's mother, who lay sick in bed upstairs suffering from heart problems. After she died, Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen emerged from their home carrying her body on a makeshift stretcher. Ms. VandenElsen brought her baby in a baby carrier. The child is now in foster care but her parents are fighting to get her back. Mr. Finck has been in custody since the standoff ended on May 21, while Ms. VandenElsen has been free for most of that time. Her freedom ended Thursday afternoon as sheriff's deputies led her and her husband from the courtroom. Justice Wright ordered her into custody at the Crown's request. "She's a substantial flight risk," Mr. Woodburn said, pointing to evidence that it is her habit to run from legal trouble and she has fled before. She had no response upon hearing that she would be remanded, but Mr. Finck stood up and asked to respond. A deputy repeated "Sit down, Larry" before he sat down. Both Mr. Finck and Ms. VandenElsen are to return to court this morning to set a date for sentencing. "You can't delay sentencing under the law," Mr. Finck said to the judge. "You don't have any right to delay it." "Yes, I can," Justice Wright said. "The sentencing is my domain and I am going to want a brief from the Crown on what they recommend. "I'm going to give you and Ms. VandenElsen an opportunity . . . if you would like to file a brief." Mr. Finck has also notified the court that he will ask for the convictions to be stayed because he and his wife were entrapped. "It doesn't seem to have any merit, from our point of view," Mr. Woodburn said outside court. A group of supporters accompanied the couple to court throughout the trial. As Ms. VandenElsen was led from the courtroom Thursday, she handed her keys and a few other belongings to one of those women. Earlier in the day, as she waited for the jury to determine her fate, Ms. VandenElsen sat on a bench outside the courthouse playing an autoharp and singing. An independent filmmaker who has been attending the court hearing videotaped the scene. Mr. Woodburn said to reporters that the Crown will consider "aggravating factors" when discussing an appropriate sentence for Ms. VandenElsen and Mr. Finck. He said such factors include "boarding up the house, firing a shotgun and keeping the police at bay for 67 hours in a residential neighbourhood." "The jury was certainly enlightened as to the different things the police did and the attempts the police made to get the people inside the house to come out peacefully" during the standoff, Mr. Woodburn said. "As the evidence showed, they waited until they came out, they didn't storm the house and they didn't go in after the initial shot was fired," he said. "They acted very professional." The Crown will also need time to review the charges on which the jury could not reach verdicts to determine whether they should be stayed or retried, he said. "(We'll) see where we stand at the end of all this," Mr. Woodburn said. "It was a very long trial. The justice acted in a very patient and professional manner all the way through it . . . (and) I have to thank the jury for their patience and diligence." Source: From the Halifax Daily News: Friday, May 13, 2005
Carline VandenElsen is going to jail for at least one year after being found guilty yesterday of firing a gun while abducting her infant daughter during last May’s standoff. That charge carries a mandatory minimum sentence of one year. However, a jury of eight men and four women were unable to reach a unanimous verdict on whether VandenElsen is guilty of the more serious charge of shooting at police to avoid arrest, which carries a four-year minimum sentence. Crown prosecutor Rick Woodburn, who tried the 10-week trial along with Len MacKay, said the jury’s verdict cleared Larry Finck’s elderly, sick mother, who died of natural causes during the standoff, of any wrongdoing. “They ID’d (VandenElsen) as the shooter in the house, and that’s important because all along (the accused) ... said Mona Finck, the mother, was the shooter of the gun,” Woodburn said. In all, jurors found VandenElsen and her husband Larry Finck both guilty of obstructing police, contravening a court custody order, possessing a shotgun for a dangerous purpose and not having a gun licence and registration. Shot fired at cops The couple pleaded not guilty to eight charges in all related to a 67-hour armed standoff on Shirley Street during which a shot was fired at officers. Police were trying to serve the couple with a court order giving temporary custody of their infant daughter to the Children’s Aid Society in Halifax. VandenElsen was also found guilty yesterday of assaulting police with a weapon and for the careless use of a shotgun. The jury, however, was unable to reach a unanimous verdict against Finck, who was jointly charged as being a party to the shooting by loading the gun. At 2:30 p.m. yesterday, Justice Robert Wright reconvened court to announce jurors were unable to reach a unanimous verdict on all eight charges. They were given a pep talk and sent back to continue deliberating. At 4:30 p.m., court reconvened again when the jury announced it was deadlocked on some charges and believed there was no chance of agreement. The couple appeared to have little reaction as the verdicts were read into the court record. Following the verdict, Woodburn told Wright he believed VandenElsen, who has fled authorities in the past, would likely do it again and asked the judge to remand her until sentencing. Finck has been in jail since his arrest last May 21. “Let’s go, folks,” said a court sheriff as he escorted the couple to jail. Woodburn told reporters the Crown will now decide whether to pursue a new trial on the remaining charges or issue a stay on them. In the meantime, Finck and VandenElsen will be back in court this morning to argue all charges against them should be stayed because they’re victims of entrapment. If yesterday’s convictions stand, Woodburn said he’ll ask for pre-sentence reports for both Finck and VandenElsen before sentencing. Woodburn said the aggravating factors in this case include barricading the house, firing a shotgun and keeping the police at bay in a residential neighbourhood for 67 hours. A sentencing date has not yet been set. The couple have said they intend to appeal any convictions. THE CHARGES Larry Finck and Carline VandenElsen faced the following charges for their actions between Jan. 13 and May 22, 2004, at or near Halifax. Here are the charges and the verdicts after their trial: 1. Did unlawfully and wilfully obstruct Lindsay Hernden, a peace officer, while engaged in the lawful execution of his duty. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: GUILTY. 2. And, being the parent having lawful care of (their child whose name is banned from publication), a person under the age of 14 years, in contravention of the custody provisions of a custody order in relation to the said (child) made by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia with intent to deprive the Children’s Aid Society of Halifax, the guardian, of possession of (the child), did detain and conceal the child. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: GUILTY. 3. And, did unlawfully have in their possession a weapon and ammunition, to wit: a 12-gauge Iver Johnson shotgun and 12-gauge ammunition for a purpose dangerous to the public peace. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: GUILTY. 4. And, did with intent to prevent the arrest and detention of Lawrence Finck and Carline VandenElsen, discharge a firearm, to wit: a shotgun at (police officers) Colin Brien, Dave Boon, Lindsay Hernden and Donald Stienburg. RESULT: VandenElsen: NO VERDICT (jury deadlocked); Finck: NO VERDICT (jury deadlocked). 5. And did use a firearm, to wit, a shotgun, while committing the indictable offence of detaining and concealing (the child) in contravention of a custody order made by the Supreme Court of Nova Scotia Family Division RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: NO VERDICT (jury deadlocked). 6. And did possess a firearm, to wit, a 12-gauge Iver Johnson shotgun without being the holder of a licence or registration for the firearm. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: GUILTY. 7. And did in committing an assault on (police officers) Colin Brien, Dave Boon, Lindsay Hernden and Donald Stienburg, use or threaten to use a weapon, or imitation thereof, to wit: a 12-gauge Iver Johnson shotgun. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: NO VERDICT (jury deadlocked). 8. And without lawful excuse use a firearm, to wit: a 12-gauge Iver Johnson shotgun in a careless manner and without reasonable precaution for the safety of other persons. RESULT: VandenElsen: GUILTY; Finck: NO VERDICT (jury deadlocked). — Kim Moar TIMELINE Timeline of events leading up to the verdict in the criminal trial for Larry Finck and his wife Carline VandenElsen: • Dec. 23, 2003: Carline VandenElsen gives birth to Larry Finck’s daughter at the IWK; • Jan. 14, 2004: Children’s Aid Society of Halifax believes the child is in need of protection and seeks a supervision order; • Jan. 15, 2004: VandenElsen leaves Halifax with her baby and travels to western Canada. That same day, Finck attends a family-court hearing where Justice Deborah Smith concludes the child is in need of protective services and issues a temporary care and custody order; • Feb. 12, 2004: Another family court hearing is held with Finck present. While Smith grants another temporary care and custody order, VandenElsen returns to the Finck family home on Shirley Street in Halifax; • March 22, 2004: Finck is back in court where he’s ordered to hand over his daughter to Children’s Aid; • May 18, 2004: Halifax Regional Police set up surveillance and confirm VandenElsen and her baby are located at 6161 Shirley St. in Halifax; • May 19, 2004: 12:30 a.m. Police attempt to serve the couple with a court order granting temporary custody of their daughter to the Halifax Children’s Aid Society; 3 a.m., a shot is fired over the heads of police officers who are using a battering ram to break down the barricaded front door; • May 21, 2004: 7:20 p.m. Finck and VandenElsen are spotted on the street carrying Finck’s dead 79-year-old mother, Mona Finck, on a makeshift stretcher. The 79-year-old woman died of natural causes around 10 a.m. that morning. VandenElsen has her baby strapped to her chest, while Finck has a loaded 12-gauge shotgun slung over his shoulder. Police surround the couple and arrest them. The baby is handed over to Children’s Aid workers. • March 7, 2005: Jury selection begins for what’s expected to be a six-week trial into charges laid against Finck and VandenElsen following the 67-hour standoff. The couple, who are being tried together, plead not guilty to eight charges; • March 9, 2005: Trial gets underway as lawyers give their opening address. The case is being prosecuted by Crown attorneys Rick Woodburn and Len MacKay. Burnley (Rocky) Jones is representing VandenElsen and Ray Kuszelewski is defending Finck; • March 17, 2005: Finck fires his lawyer so he can represent himself; • April 25, 2005: VandenElsen fires her lawyer. • May 10, 2005: Jury sequestered. • May 12, 2005: Jury delivers verdict of guilty on many counts for both accused but is deadlocked on others. — Kim Moar Source: For more on this case:
Posted by Dufferin VOCA.
|
