In early 2016, Ontario Court Justice John Keast texted his long-time friend, Lynda Cullain, who worked for the local children’s aid society, and said: “Life will never be simple for us Lynda. We will probably not have smooth sailing till we’re in heaven. LOL.”

Indeed, the next two years would prove to be the opposite of smooth sailing in the case of the Sudbury judge, who last week was suspended for 30 days without pay by a discipline panel of the Ontario Judicial Council for judicial misconduct.

At the heart of the case is a series of text messages exchanged between Keast and Cullain, a manager at the Children’s Aid Society for the Districts of Sudbury and Manitoulin, in the early part of 2016, and that Keast had unsuccessfully tried to exclude in his discipline hearing. (When the panel admitted them, Keast admitted to judicial misconduct and an agreed statement of facts was filed.)

The long-time judge improperly communicated confidential information, used his friendship with Cullain to gain access to confidential information, expressed views about a children’s aid society (CAS) case over which he was going to preside, and made inappropriate comments “that could be perceived as indicating bias against the CAS, an institution that regularly appeared before him,” the discipline panel said in its decision on punishment released last week.

He referred to a CAS manager as a “bitch” in one text message, and in another referred to the agency as a “zoo.”

Lawyers for Keast and the CAS declined to comment to the Star.

Keast is now asking the panel to make a recommendation to the attorney general for partial or full compensation for his legal fees, close to $150,000 including disbursements and HST. Presenting counsel, the lawyers tasked with “presenting” the case against Keast and which includes prominent Toronto lawyer Marie Henein, took no issue on his request, which is permitted under the law.

The panel, chaired by Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Eileen Gillese, found the misconduct to be so serious that they decided to impose an even harsher punishment than what presenting counsel had put forward, which was 15 days without pay. Keast’s lawyer, Paul Stern, had argued for a warning or reprimand.

“In our view, given the nature and extent of the misconduct, the real choice was between the second most serious sanction available — suspension without pay for 30 days — and recommending that Justice Keast be removed from office,” the panel wrote.

“In the end, we concluded that a recommendation for removal was not necessary to restore public confidence in Justice Keast and in the administration of justice generally.”

The panel noted he has been a judge for 17 years, and has no prior discipline history.

“In the circumstances, we are satisfied that Justice Keast will not repeat this sort of conduct and that the CAS need have no fear about the treatment it would receive from Justice Keast,” the panel said.

The text exchange in question began in January 2016, according to the discipline panel’s decision, when Keast reached out to long-time friend Cullain at the CAS when he learned that a young person he knew was “at immediate risk of harm.” There had been other situations involving this person before, but Keast and Cullain were able to resolve them. This time was different.

“Justice Keast was seized of a CAS case that itself was pressing and at a critical stage,” the panel said. “He was concerned that the witnesses in the case before him might also become involved in resolving his personal situation.”

As Keast put it in one text to Cullain, on whether he might have a conflict of interest: “It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the mess I will be in.”

He did tell the regional senior justice about some elements of his personal situation, but not everything, the panel said.

The text exchange between Keast and Cullain, which was filed as an exhibit at his discipline hearing, touches on that personal situation but also on Cullain’s future plans about working at the CAS and eventually leaving, where Keast offers advice on salary and pensions.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“You f---- them good. It’s all bonus money. You were ready to leave anyway in a month,” Keast texted. “You might have to think about telling them you want a package from the date of retirement going forward, and get the f--- out (of) that zoo!”

When Cullain says that she will tell her superiors she has spoken to her “counsel,” the following exchange takes place:

Keast: “You have spoken to your counsel!!! Isn’t that who I am???”

Cullain: “Yea of course but they don’t know it’s you!!!”

Keast: “Lol lol.”

Cullain: “I know. Haha. They would crap their drawers if they knew. And they NEVER will!!”

Keast: “95% of what you and I talk about is highly classified!!!”

Cullain: “I know. Like the CIA.”

According to the discipline panel decision, an individual took copies of the text messages from Keast’s phone without his knowledge and provided them to the CAS, and the agency then filed a complaint with the judicial council.

Keast had argued the text messages should be excluded because they were obtained “unlawfully” and infringed his rights, but the panel disagreed.

“The initial search of Justice Keast’s cellphone and subsequent seizure of the text messages (by copying) was carried out by an individual, acting in his or her private capacity,” the panel said. “The state did not search or seize Justice Keast’s cellphone.”