Anne Calder is a former Nova Scotia Crown Attorney and defense lawyer. On July 14th, 2009 she delivered drugs to her client inside the Central Nova Scotia Correctional Facility in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia.
She got caught. She went to trial, where she tried claiming she was not able to make rational decisions due to stress and other factors.
 Dr. Rosenberg’s testimony was called to support a conclusion that Ms. Calder’s diagnosis, and the various stressors in her life, somehow deprived her of the level of intent required for a conviction. Given my findings of fact on the critical issue, Dr. Rosenberg’s evidence does not have that effect. I can accept that Ms. Calder’s mental and physical health, as well as her many stressors, might have impacted on her resolve. I can also accept that these factors may have dimmed Ms. Calder’s view of consequences. However, that does not equate to a lack of intent. Ms. Calder knew she was being asked to traffic to Mr. Izzard, was ambivalent about it for some time and then decided to take her chances on not getting caught. This decision was misguided but rationally made after considering the balance between her sense of guilt and her view of the risks.
The judge found her guilty on all counts.
On Friday, June 17th, 2011 she was in Nova Scotia Supreme Court to face sentencing for her crimes.
Justice Kevin Coady sentenced Calder to 30 months in prison for trafficking in prescription drugs and possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking.
Now she’ll have her own lawyer visiting her in prison. Her law career is over.
Justice Coady was upset that Calder would “exploit the trust” of prison guards who treat lawyers who are treated differently than ordinary prison visitors. Regular visitors are searched and are physically separated from the inmates they are visiting.
Lawyers, on the other hand, are not really searched at all, and can meet with their clients with no physical barrier between them.
This is what made Calder’s crime possible. The guards never searched her or her briefcase, making it possible for her to hand a package of drugs right to her client, Thomas Izzard.
While Crown Attorney Paul Adams wanted a four year prison term, Calder’s defense lawyer argued that she should serve her sentence in the community, meaning house arrest and probation.
How ridiculous! She violated the public’s trust and should pay the price.
Thankfully Justice Coady didn’t buy in to the defense argument, sentencing her to 30 months in prison.
Naturally, she claims she is innocent of any wrongdoing. No wonder the judge was not amused.
From the written ruling:
 Correctional Officer Beaton observed the visit from the reception area. He noted behaviour that he described as “suspicious.” He observed Mr. Izzard take something off the table and put it in his pants pocket. He then pulled up the images on his screen and felt that his suspicions were confirmed. He contacted his supervisors’ McNamara and Dominix and advised them of his concerns. Mr. Beaton suggested they view the video of Ms. Calder’s contact with Mr. Izzard.
 Captain Dominix viewed the video from her office. It depicted Ms. Calder and Mr. Izzard sitting across a narrow table from each other. She observed Ms. Calder bending over and reaching into her bag and then putting an object on the table. The object was pushed toward Mr. Izzard who “fumbled around” and then put his hand under the table. Correctional Officer McGammon was invited to view the video and came to the same conclusion; a transaction had occurred. Captain Dominix decided to terminate the visit.
 Mr. Izzard was then removed from the interview room and Ms. Calder was directed to remain. Captain Dominix directed Correctional Officers LeFort and Mrvelk to conduct a search of Mr. Izzard in another room. The officers first observed that Mr. Izzard was placing his hand in his pants. He was told to cease that activity. A pat down search was conducted and produced nothing. Mr. Izzard’s insistence on placing his hand in his pants prompted the officers to conduct a strip search. After Mr. Izzard stripped to his briefs, one officer told him to produce whatever he was hiding. Mr. Izzard then produced a cylindrical object wrapped in cellophane. The object was immediately recognized as a “prison package,” a term used to describe the delivery of contraband into the facility through the human rectum.
 The package was three to four inches long and very tightly wrapped.
Anyone taking a long, thin, tightly-wrapped package into a prison, and then claims NOT to know what’s inside that package is either lying or is a moron. Or both. My suspicion is that Anne Calder is both.
During her trial it came out that “unusual packages” would show up in Calder’s mailbox, and that she would occasionally call her office to see if a delivery had arrived.
That’s hardly the actions of someone who is unaware of what she is doing.
Those are the actions of someone who knows exactly what they’re doing.
It is not rational to conclude Calder didn’t know what was inside these packages. No person of average intelligence will come to that conclusion, yet Calder stuck to that story from the start, right through to her sentencing hearing.
It’s no wonder we can’t keep drugs, weapons and even handguns out of our prisons! If lawyers are among those willing to undermine the system, what chance do prison guards have?
Perhaps we should start strip-searching lawyers and leaving the regular visitors alone?
After all, they’re not the ones who have physical access to the inmates!