Skip to content

'Plenty of blame to go around,' in Elliot Lake mall collapse, says judge

Judge finds former engineer not guilty of criminal charges, but says he must take moral responsibility, and takes aim at 'neglectful, greedy owner' and Elliot Lake city officials who 'did not exercise sufficient vigilance'
170601RobertWoodvideo
Robert Wood leaves the Sault Ste. Marie Courthouse this afternoon after being found not guilty of all charges related to the Elliot Lake mall collapse. SooToday

Former engineer Robert Wood was found not guilty Thursday of criminal charges stemming from the June 23, 2012 Elliot Lake mall collapse.

In a lengthy 81-page decision, most of which he read in court, Superior Court Justice Edward Gareau said the Sault Ste. Marie man's engineering work related to the Algo Centre mall could be described as "shoddy, sloppy and even inadequate."

But his actions didn't reach the level of being criminal, he told more than three dozen people, including family members of the two women killed in the collapse, crowded into a small third-floor courtroom to hear his long-awaited decision.

Lucie Aylwin, 37, and Doloris Perizzolo, 74, died when a portion of the mall roof parking deck collapsed onto the food court area, where Alywin worked at the lottery ticket kiosk and the older woman was a customer.

The only person charged criminally in connection with the cave-in, Wood inspected the mall in April 2012 and declared it structurally sound, weeks before the fatal incident that also injured numerous people.

At the time, his engineer's licence had been suspended for an unrelated matter.

He pleaded not guilty to two counts of criminal negligence causing death and a single count of criminal negligence causing bodily harm, at the beginning of his trial that began in September 2016 and was conducted over a span of five months.

Gareau said Wood must accept moral responsibility for what occurred, but the evidence heard during the trial clearly indicated he should not bear sole responsibility.

"There is plenty of blame to go around from a neglectful, greedy owner who minimized problems and put cost ahead of people in remedying deficiencies in the mall, to officials of the City of Elliot Lake who left serious matters concerning the mall in abeyance for lengthy periods of time and did not exercise sufficient vigilance to ensure that the citizens of Elliot Lake were safe when attending the mall."

The judge, who indicated he had struggled with his decision, said the sad tale of the mall is as much about human frailties and inadequacies as it is about a connection that failed in the structure.

He referred to a letter a resident Sarrah Brown had written to the editor of the Elliot Lake Standard in 2008, expressing her concerns about the mall's safety.

She called for government agencies to close the structure until the problems had been rectified.

There is much to reflect upon in her comments, Gareau said reading a portion where she said "I hope we are not at some point in the future glued to our TV screens following a calamity as government officials, yet again, seek excuses and places to lay blame for their lack of action."

Gareau said his ruling is not to be taken to minimize what occurred and the tragic consequences.

Aylwin and Perizzolo "suffered horrific and unnecessary deaths" and others were seriously injured.

The loss of life and damage to people has had a profound effect on parents, family, friends and the community of Elliot Lake, he said.

His voice cracking, he noted that Aylwin's parents were present in court, from time to time, during the lengthy trial.

"Their loss is obviously a terrible one," Gareau said, indicating he is painfully aware of that in making his decision. "The natural order of things is disrupted when a parent loses a child."

The court must apply the facts to the law and not be swayed by emotions or public opinion, he said.

Gareau said after considering all the evidence, he was not satisfied that Wood's actions and omissions, although they may meet the civil standard for negligence, are elevated to the level required for criminal culpability beyond a reasonable doubt.

His decision wasn't condoning Wood's actions during the 2009 and 2012 inspections of the mall or endorsing his flawed structural reports, the judge said.

"Mr. Wood had the last reasonable opportunity to prevent a disaster at the mall and he failed miserably resulting in the death of two innocent people."

During the trial, Gareau heard from Dr. Hassan Saffarini, who was the lead person for NORR Limited, a Toronto-based architect and engineering firm, retained by the Ontario Provincial Police, to conduct a forensic investigation into the cause of the collapse.

Saffarini's March 8, 2013 report indicated the evidence was clear the mall leaked for an extensive period of time, actually from the time it was built in 1980.

The uncovered parking deck was never properly waterproofed, creating what Saffarini described as a "marine like environment," Garneau said.

The infiltration of water, particularly into the structural steel, led to corrosion which resulted in significantly depleted weld at the connection of one of the steel beams.

The steel beam collapsed when this connection failed and caused the mall's partial cave-in.

Gareau noted that many other professionals, engineers and architects, who had inspected the mall over the years, had concluded as Wood did, that it was structurally sound.

Although Saffarini "found this surprising and even alarming," the fact remains that other professionals made the same conclusion, he said.

In his report Saffarini indicated none of the engineers' reports raised an alarm about the corroding steel frame nor did they suggest any requirements to monitor the corrosion.

Saffarini, the Crown's lead expert, testified that an engineer, who saw the condition and level of corrosion in the mall, could still have reached the professional judgement that the mall was safe.

"Although this judgement would be 'poor judgment,' in the words of Dr. Saffarini, I conclude from the evidence of Dr. Saffarini that it would not be an act or omission that reflects an unrestrained disregard for the consequences," Gareau said.

The judge said the evidence indicated Wood failed to do many things that would be expected of a reasonable engineer in his 2009 and 2012 inspections.

He didn't scrape beams to get the best view of the steel members and did no testing with instruments to determine the loss of section in the beams.

At times he inspected steel members from floor level when he should have used a ladder to view them. 

As one expert witness put it "you can't inspect what you can't see," Gareau said.

Gareau called it troubling that Wood didn't inspect or examine the steel beams at the ticket kiosk area in 2012, although he had identified it as an area of concern three years earlier.

Wood didn't take the 2009 report with him to the mall in April 2012 when he did his inspection or review it in any detail, if at all, prior to conducting the inspection.

 "All of this is more troubling" given it was the connection on this beam that failed leading to the collapse, the judge said.

Wood's explanation for not inspecting the beam was that he didn't see any leaking in the area and determined it didn't need to be inspected.

When he testified, he told the court "I made a judgment that there was no leaking at that area, and, therefore my time was better spent looking at other areas."

Events subsequent to that 2012 inspection show Wood "was very wrong in his assessment" not to inspect the beam and "exercised colossal poor judgment" in not inspecting in 2012 the beam he had identified as being "in a location of significant water leaks," Gareau said.

But the judge said the court had no expert evidence to suggest Wood's failure to inspect the beam constituted a marked and substantial departure from what one would expect from a reasonable engineer.

"I cannot conclude that the conduct of Mr. Wood is so egregious that it is obvious that his conduct has fallen short of the standard of care expected of a reasonable engineer."

After Gareau delivered his decision, defence counsel Robert MacRae told the court he was abandoning his Charter application for a stay of proceedings because of the length of time it had taken for the matter to get to trial.

The motion was slated to be heard on July 25.

EDITOR'S NOTE: SooToday does not allow comments on court stories


What's next?


If you would like to apply to become a Verified reader Verified Commenter, please fill out this form.



About the Author: Linda Richardson

Linda Richardson is a freelance journalist who has been covering Sault Ste. Marie's courts and other local news for more than 45 years.
Read more