Brian the Devil's Advocate

Brian could easily have been a lawyer. I told him precisely that and he replied that he had thought about it early on, but decided he would rather have a personal life. Good point. Brian loved playing devil’s advocate and would grill us on every issue. Even where common sense and fair play would lead most people to take a certain side or course of action, he would show you how wrong you could be in making such assumptions. He would often leave us tongue-tied and stumped to rebut his arguments. I wish I could come up with a specific example to illustrate this. Whenever we could come up with a reasonably good defense to his arguments, then we felt SO victorious like we won a medal at the Olympics! Just to be able to evenly match his superb logic was a feat in itself.

He loved to tell the story about how he single-handedly thwarted a lawyer during a hearing regarding the Seaton Land Exchange deal. He was testifying as an expert witness as the one responsible for preparing and posting a Class Environmental Assessment for the land swap deal made by the Province with developers so that lands in the Oak Ridges Moraine could be protected, in exchange for developable lands in Pickering. A developer who did not get that deal, filed a judicial review of the province’s decision. There was a point during the hearing when the lawyer representing the developer asked Brian whether he could recall certain details about public consultation for the Class Environmental Assessment. Brian said he could not recall. The lawyer called for a recess and asked Brian to review a bunch of documents so that he could later respond to the question.

As Brian was reviewing the materials, he realized that the whole basis of the lawyer’s argument was faulty. The lawyer had assumed that Brian had followed the current Class Environmental Assessment process, not realizing that there was an older version that was followed for this specific process. Brian had him! He plotted the way he would answer the lawyer’s line of questioning so that he could force him to ask a very specific question where Brian could then at that point nail him! It was like leading the lawyer down the garden path; using a lawyer’s courtroom tactic, but in reverse! When the hearing resumed, the lawyer began to ask his line of questions. Then, as Brian had plotted, the lawyer did eventually ask the critical question, “So Brian, do you testify that you followed the procedures as outlined in this Class Environmental Assessment document?”, while holding up the current version of the document. Brian flatly replied, “No”. The lawyer did a double-take and looked confused. “So, you’re saying you did not comply with the Class Environmental Assessment process?” Brian replied, “No, I didn’t say that. I’m saying that I did not follow THAT process, I followed the PREVIOUS version of the Class Environmental Assessment!” The lawyer was visibly flabbergasted. The whole basis of his argument was just thrown out the window and he looked like a fool! Exactly the effect that Brian wanted. The lawyers working on Brian’s side were very impressed by his performance. Years later, the lead counsel would jokingly ask Brian for an affidavit, because he was such a fantastic witness on the stand. I could tell that Brian was very proud of his performance in that hearing, and it indeed was a performance of the theatrical kind! Brilliant mind and brilliant performance. I can’t think of anyone else I know who has both talents with as remarkable a display.