TERRACE BAY, Ont. – A lawyer for Mary Alexa McKinnon, the former Director of Education for the Superior North Catholic School Board, says criminal charges against his client, which were recently withdrawn by the Crown, were without merit, and she is not required to make restitution to the board.
Anthony Moustacalis responded Friday to a story published on tbnewswatch.com on Wednesday, which he said was incorrect.
The story quoted board chair Hugh McCorry, who had issued this statement regarding the outcome of the case:
The terms were as follows for Alexa McKinnon, former Director of Education and Rod McKinnon, former Supervising Manager of Plant and IT.
- Payment of restitution to the Superior North Catholic Board
- Rod McKinnon entered into a common law peace bond which is an order that he not attend at Board premises and contact Board employees
- The criminal charges were thereafter withdrawn. A withdrawal is a discretionary decision by the Crown not to proceed with the prosecution any further. Although it is not a finding of not guilty, neither is it a finding of responsibility in any way.
Rod McKinnon and Mary Alexa McKinnon were charged last year by the OPP with fraud over $5,000 and breach of trust. Police said they had been contacted by board officials about an alleged fraud of over $25,000.
Moustacalis noted Friday that the court record shows the Crown determined it was not in the public interest to prosecute the case.
He also submitted a statement on behalf of Mary Alexa McKinnon:
Ms. McKinnon did not make a payment or settlement at all with the schoolboard with respect to the criminal charges. Ms. McKinnon is a well regarded and senior educator and manager for over 30 years. Charges against her were without merit and she advised the court she was not guilty and set a trial date to vindicate her innocence. All charges against her with withdrawn before trial after a recent review by senior Crown counsel.
Rod McKinnon's lawyer said Friday that his client has made a payment of $10,000 to the board.
He said the payment was not restitution, but rather was made "to make the board whole" and eliminate the need for any further litigation between the two parties.
