Deputy chief’s testimony builds timeline of events in Walbourne trial

UPDATE April 24, 2026: Holly Walbourne has been acquitted of all charges.

It’s time to get into the meat and potatoes of the Holly Walbourne trial.

Deputy Chief Ryan Hughes returned to the stand Wednesday morning to finish his testimony. Hughes is a key figure in this case. He initiated the criminal investigation into police board chair Georjann Morriseau that sparked the misconduct charges against former police chief Sylvie Hauth and her legal aide Holly Walbourne.

Hughes’ personal notebook, teased Tuesday afternoon in a surprise admission to the court, will likely be a non-factor in this case. Many of the notes were undated, not consecutively numbered, and personal in nature, and Thunder Bay police policy requires officers to maintain only one notebook at a time.

On Wednesday, the Crown prosecution team presented a series of emails exchanged between Hughes, Walbourne and Hauth in November and December 2020 concerning “The HomeSense Investigation” into Morriseau. During this period, the matter was elevated to a criminal investigation and later transferred to the OPP (the OPP cleared Morriseau of all charges in August 2021).

On Tuesday, the Crown confirmed they are looking to prove beyond reasonable doubt that:

• Holly Walbourne was aware of a criminal investigation into Georjann Morriseau and a criminal code production order of her phone prior to December 9, 2020.

And,

• Holly Walbourne lied or intentionally misled a Ontario Civilian Police Commission officer about her knowledge during their two meetings regarding the case in March and May of 2022.

And/or

• Holly Walbourne and/or Sylvie Hauth lied or intentionally misled the police board about their knowledge in two memoranda to the board in October of 2021.

This is in regards to the HomeSense investigation.

Former police chief Sylvie Hauth (left) and former board chair Georjann Morriseau in an undated file photo

Through the emails and reports shared with the court, we can build a timeline of correspondence between Hughes, Walbourne and Hauth. It is important to note that Hughes was on medical leave at this time. He said he was not checking his emails every day, and was communicating over the phone while working from home.

This is not a complete timeline of events, as evidence is still being presented to the court. Updates will be provided when available. Comments and discussions not documented in emails are drawn from witness testimony and should not be treated as independently verified facts.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

August 2020

Morriseau reports to Deputy Chief Hughes a conversation in HomeSense with an unidentified masked officer who showed her the text from Webster to Constable Michael Dimini’s police phone. She testified that she believed she was simply relaying an odd interaction, but that he treated the matter far more seriously than she had anticipated.

September 8

After three separate statements from Morriseau, Detective Rob Gombola closes the internal Police Services Act investigation into the HomeSense incident. (PSA investigations are not criminal)

Mid-September

Morriseau reaches out to then-Police Chief Sylvie Hauth about being being “interrogated constantly” in regards to the HomeSense conversation. Hauth does not respond.

September 23

Days after Morriseau messages Hauth, Holly Walbourne travels to Georjann Morriseau’s house to speak with her about the HomeSense investigation, among other things. She told OCPC interviewer Ian Scott that she was not aware the internal investigation was closed at this time, and was operating as if it was active.

“I think once the meeting at my house (with Walbourne) took place, I was feeling more and more that there’s something else happening in the background here in terms of why I am continually being interrogated here,” Morriseau testified. “I felt like I had to watch my back everywhere I turn.”

November 10

Detective Jason Rybak complains to Hughes about his name being brought up in the HomeSense investigation, which reopens the internal case. Hughes testified that at this time he suspected but could not confirm that Georjann Morriseau gave Rybak that information. He said he spoke with Holly Walbourne afterwards, and the possibility of a criminal investigation arises.

November 19, approx. 9 am

Holly Walbourne emails Hughes and Hauth informing them that Morriseau has stopped responding to the officer investigating the HomeSense incident. (It’s important to note that Morriseau was a witness at this time, not a suspect). In the email, Walbourne describes the actions as a “willful obstruction of the investigation” and says she intends to draft a letter to the board.

Hughes said he interpreted this as encouragement to open a criminal case into Morriseau. The defence asserts that Walbourne did not direct Hughes to initiate a criminal investigation in this email, nor did she have the power to.

November 19, approx. 11 am

Hughes testified that he called Rybak after receiving Walbourne’s email, who “uncomfortably” confirmed that Morriseau told him his name was in the HomeSense investigation.

November 23, 10:04 am

Hughes opens a case file on the situation, formalizing a criminal investigation into Morriseau. Access to the file is limited to himself and Hauth. Hughes emails Sylvie Hauth, briefing her on this and Rybak’s admission. He does not include Walbourne on this email. He testified that this was because there were “talkers in the building.”

November 23, 10:10 am

Hauth writes back: “10-4. Thanks for the update. The plot thickens…”

Hughes testified that he perceived this meant he had authorization to go ahead with the criminal investigation into Morriseau.

Hughes said that at the time, he did not recognize an issue with the Thunder Bay Police Service criminally investigating its own board chair. He testified that he has since changed his mind on that position.

November 25

Hughes adds Detective Dan Irwin to the case file, instructing him to interview Rybak as the lead investigator. Hughes confirmed on the stand that the criminal investigation into Morriseau is now “fully up and running” at this point.

November 26

Irwin interviews Rybak.

November 27

Hughes emails Hauth informing her of the interview, writing “you will see Rybak squirming in Irwin’s report, [he] doesn’t trust me, and thinks you and Holly [Walbourne] are out to get him.” Hughes writes that he instructed Detective Graham Forshaw to request a production order from August 30 to mid-November to connect Rybak and Morriseau’s phones.

November 30

This brings us to the phone conversation between Hughes, Hauth and Walbourne that was identified as a key piece of evidence in the trial on Tuesday.

Hughes testified the call lasted about 15 minutes, per his memory. He said the call was to brief them on his two phone calls with Rybak, Irwin’s interview of Rybak, and his request for a production order into Morriseau’s phone.

He said neither Hauth nor Walbourne discouraged him from continuing with the production order.

This is a key point of contention in the trial.

In her interview with the OCPC, Walbourne said she did not recall mention of a phone production order on this day, did not know the investigation was criminal and recommended Hughes “hold off” until advised by outside legal counsel.

Ex-Police Chief Sylvie Hauth and Deputy Chief Ryan Hughes (file photo)

December 1

A production order for Morriseau’s phone is granted. Hughes testified that he learned this at a later time, and did not notify Hauth or Walbourne.

December 9, am

This is when Walbourne told the OCPC she first knew of the criminal investigation into Morriseau and that a production order was granted for Morriseau’s phone. She said Hughes told her that the production order was granted for the criminal investigation over a call, and that she was shocked to hear this. According to the OCPC investigator, Hughes said this conversation did not take place.

December 9, pm

Walbourne meets with outside legal counsel, who formally advise her to transfer the investigation outside of the TBPS.

December 14

Hughes returns to the office from medical leave. He testified that he learned that morning the investigation had been transferred to the OPP, but said he does not recall being told a reason for the transfer. He said that he does not recall speaking with Walbourne or Hauth about the Morriseau investigation between the 1st and the 14th.

The defence presented records that Hughes and Walbourne had phone calls on November 30 (an hour after the meeting between the two of them and Hauth), December 1, December 4 (twice), and December 10. Hughes says he has no notes and no recollection of these calls.

December 18

Hughes sends an email to Sylvie Hauth “clarifying her question today about what was going on with [him].” In the email, he responded to Hauth’s assertion the day before that he had not kept her properly informed about the Morriseau investigation, pointing to his Nov. 23 email and sharing his request for a production order as evidence that he had done so.

Former TBPS Chief Sylvie Hauth (file photo)

December 24

The OPP’s investigation into Morriseau is assigned to its Criminal Investigations Branch.

December 28

The production order for Morriseau’s phone is complete and forwarded to Detective Irwin’s phone. Irwin analyzes the contents and writes a summary report. Irwin testified he was aware that the OPP was conducting an investigation at this point, but he wanted to “finish the one part that [he] started”. He said he did not recall ever being instructed to cease his investigation.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Georjann Morriseau filed a report to Tribunals Ontario alleging an improper criminal investigation after the OPP cleared her of all charges. Sylvie Hauth wrote a confidential memo explaining the investigation to the police board around three months later.

Hughes testified that after reading Hauth’s memo, he told Hauth that he knew Walbourne had written it, he felt like it wasn’t accurate, and Walbourne had “thrown (him) under the bus” regarding the Morriseau investigation.

Hughes said that Hauth responded that “it had to be done”, and he needed to explain himself to the board. Hughes sent her an email on October 14 outlining their correspondence from November and December 2020, arguing it showed her initial memo was inaccurate.

The OCPC concluded that “The HomeSense Investigation” by the TBPS into its own board chair was improper due to an “obvious” conflict of interest. It acknowledged that Deputy Chief Hughes had initiated the investigation, but asserted that Chief Hauth was his superior officer, was well aware of the investigation, did not immediately stop it, and misled the board about it in her two memos, and therefore should bare primary responsibility.

The OCPC investigator also noted that officers are not compelled to testify at their own hearings, so it was not possible to charge Hauth and Hughes together. The investigator wrote in a report that it was preferable to only charge Hauth and to have Hughes as the OCPC’s lead witness.

On January 20, 2022, Hughes was suspended from the force for around 12 months from an investigation by the Toronto Police Service into complaints made by Holly Walbourne and Sgt. Michael Dimini concerning matters unrelated to Georjann Morriseau or the police board.

None of the allegations against Walbourne or Hauth have been proven in court.

This is an ongoing story. Updates will be provided when available.