In the end, disgraced auto parts billionaire Frank Stronach, with all his wealth and power, could not escape the reckoning that has come decades after his “gross and disgusting” behaviour as an entitled serial womanizer.
But while the married 93-year-old tried to force himself on two young women decades his junior after luring them to an apartment — and was convicted of historical indecent assault, for grinding against one, and sexual assault for groping another — the Magna International founder was acquitted on 10 other charges which included the more serious allegations of rape.
So the Order of Canada recipient is now a convicted lecherous abuser — but not a rapist.
Judge's Ruling and Key Testimony
Superior Court Justice Anne Molloy presided over the lengthy judge-alone trial that had seven complainants involving 12 counts at its sensational opening earlier this year and four women and five charges remaining when it sputtered to its end. With so many of the allegations withdrawn by the Crown and numerous witnesses wilting under the fiery cross-examination of defence lawyer Leora Shemesh, it looked like the privileged business magnate would walk away a free man.
The judge, however, was convinced by the accounts of a former legal secretary who frequented Stronach’s disco, Rooney’s, in the 1970s and a former cocktail waitress who worked there in the early 1980s.
Incident with Legal Secretary
In 1977, the secretary was in her mid-20s and had accepted an invitation back to Stronach’s apartment at Balliol St. and Mt. Pleasant Rd. when he suddenly pushed her over the padded arm of a chair, raised her skirt and pressed his groin against her. Despite finding her combative and rude under cross-examination, Molloy said she was believable and Stronach’s actions were “morally repugnant.”
“While (she) was simply looking out the window of his apartment, he pushed her over a chair and pushed her skirt up. That could be indecent assault by itself,” Molloy wrote. “But standing over her and grinding his pelvis into her vaginal area is, quite simply, gross and disgusting conduct.”
Incident with Cocktail Waitress
The cocktail waitress had agreed to meet Stronach for dinner because she wanted to know why she had been unexpectedly fired from Rooney’s in the early 1980s. Molloy found her “a compelling, believable and truthful witness” in her account of how she was trying to leave his Harbourfront condo after realizing it was a mistake to come, when he ran his hands up and down her body, touching the side of her breasts and hips, as he helped her on with her coat and tried to convince her to stay.
“He just proceeded without asking,” the judge said in convicting him of sexual assault. “While this just might be the way many men acted in the ’80s, that does not excuse the conduct nor does it make it consensual,” she concluded. “The conduct, although minor, was nevertheless touching of a sexual nature without consent. That makes it sexual assault.”
Issues with Other Complainants
Molloy found many reliability problems with the two remaining complainants: The account of a former horse groom at Stronach’s barn, who said she was digitally penetrated through her pantyhose on the dance floor of his disco and then raped in his waterfront condo was “full of holes and gaps and inconsistencies” and completely unbelievable.
The judge found the testimony of a businesswoman who alleged that consensual kissing with Stronach in his condo turned into rape when he ignored her protests and ripped through her pantyhose was possibly tainted after she read the groom’s story in the media. Molloy also said she lied under oath about different issues and she could not “rule out the possibility that she had a financial motive to fabricate” though she did not believe it was her prime motivator.
“I cannot make a finding that (she) ever said ‘no’ to Mr. Stronach and I cannot determine when she stopped actively participating in what she described as a make-out session,” the judge concluded. “It is ‘possible’ that nothing happened without her consent but that she felt used and demeaned in some way.”
Defence Reaction and Police Investigation
Stronach’s lawyer welcomed his acquittal on the most violent charges. “We are elated that he was acquitted of the very serious offences but disappointed by the convictions on the minor offences. We will review the decision carefully and decide next steps,” Shemesh said in an email.
But what would have happened if Stronach had not the money for a top-class lawyer and expensive private detectives to help negate so many of the most serious accusations against him? Molloy pondered that question herself in her 83-page ruling. Shemesh had criticized the lack of a thorough investigation by Peel Regional Police whose “believe the victim” approach to sexual assault complainants meant not questioning their stories or even having them swear to tell the truth. While the judge approved of their sensitive approach, she agreed someone charged with sex assault deserves the same fair and unbiased police investigation to test the truth of the allegations as any other accused.
In one case, Stronach’s lawyer showed he was out of the country on the date the horse groom said she was raped in 1980.
“I query whether an accused without the financial resources available to Mr. Stronach would have been able to mount a defence to these charges as effectively as he was able to do through the employment of private detectives,” Molloy warned. “I would hope there would be a thoughtful analysis and internal review of these (police) policies.”
Stronach returns to court in September for sentencing and faces a second sexual assault trial next year in Newmarket.
