Verdict expected in fraud, breach of trust case of former B.C. Legislature clerk

A B.C. Supreme Court judge is expected to deliver a verdict Thursday on fraud and breach of trust charges against a man described as the former "chief executive officer" of B.C.'s legislature.

Craig James pleaded not guilty to using his position as clerk of the house to improperly access benefits ranging in scale from a quarter-million-dollar retirement payout to expense items including cufflinks and a Union Jack pillow embroidered with the words "God Save The Queen."

Prosecutors also accused James of spearheading a decision to use legislature funds to purchase a wood splitter and trailer that was kept at his home — allegations that spawned an avalanche of headlines.

Associate Chief Justice Heather Holmes is expected to hand down her verdict at 9 a.m. PT. The decision is one of the most hotly anticipated rulings in B.C. politics in years.

James worked at the legislature from 1987 until his resignation in 2019, months after he was placed on administrative leave and led off the grounds by police under a cloud of suspicion.

As clerk of the house, he was both an adviser to the House Speaker and overseer of the 300 administrative employees who provide non-partisan support to the politicians tasked by voters to run the province. 

During a trial that spanned two months, the Crown argued James had demonstrated a "marked departure from the standard of responsible management expected of a person occupying one of the highest offices in the province."

Witnesses included a former Speaker of the house and the woman who succeeded James in the job as clerk.

Kate Ryan-Lloyd voluntarily returned a retirement payout written out to her at the same time as James received a $257,988.38 benefit under a program prosecutors claimed had been long terminated.

In a letter to James entered into evidence, she wrote: "I continue to be uncomfortable with accepting such a sizeable payment as a long-service award."

James did not testify in his own defence.

In their closing arguments, his lawyers claimed prosecutors had failed to provide any evidence of corruption, claiming that at worst, all the Crown had proven was that James might be guilty of "bureaucratic ineptitude" — which is not a crime.

They pointed a finger instead at former House Speaker Darryl Plecas, who defence lawyer Gavin Cameron accused of going on a "crusade" to find wrongdoing.

"Mr. Plecas wrote a highly publicized report containing inflammatory and demonstrably false allegations," Cameron said.