Man loses alleged discrimination case
For the second time, the Yukon Human Rights Board of Adjudication has dismissed a complaint from a man convicted of beating and sexually assaulting a number of women,
For the second time, the Yukon Human Rights Board of Adjudication has dismissed a complaint from a man convicted of beating and sexually assaulting a number of women, who says the government discriminated against him on the basis of his criminal record.
Thomas Molloy claims he was fired from his job with the Yukon Tourism Education Council (YTEC) because of his criminal record.
This record includes several convictions for fraud, multiple sex assaults and spousal assault.
He was also charged with molesting an infant, but was acquitted after trial.
After hearing Molloy's case a second time, the human rights board ruled it was Molloy's violent behaviour which led to his dismissal, not the criminal record which followed
The four-person board also found Molloy to be an unreliable witness who "played with words in such a manner as to mislead the triers of fact” during his most recent hearing.
In late 2004, YTEC hired Molloy, who now lives in Edmonton, to teach a course to Yukon government employees.
He was abruptly dismissed when several women in the class learned of his violent history. They complained about having him as an instructor, saying they no longer felt safe in his classroom.
Molloy launched a human rights complaint against YTEC and the government, which had contracted YTEC to provide customer service training for its staff.
The claim against YTEC was eventually dropped, but Molloy and the human rights commission continued to pursue the case against the government.
The first time his case was heard by the human rights board, it was dismissed because the panel found there was no evidence Molloy was employed by the government; therefore the government could not discriminate against him.
The human rights commission, a separate body which receives and investigates complaints, appealed the decision.
Justice Harvey Groberman granted the appeal. Although the government did not hire Molloy, the justice said, it did interfere with his employment, and therefore engaged a unique section of the Yukon Human Rights Act.
This time around, the human rights board – which is now chaired by a lawyer – did a detailed analysis of the case law surrounding the matter.
The board found the Yukon government made the decision to withdraw its employees not because of Molloy's criminal record, per se, but out of concern for the employees health and safety.
As one witness told the four-person panel, it was his understanding Molloy "had a history of preying on women ... that he took opportunities in the workplace to target potential victims.”
The fact that Molloy's violent behaviour also led to criminal charges is irrelevant, the board decided.
For his part, Molloy tried to downplay his extensive record of assaulting, raping, and harassing his wives and girlfriends.
During the hearing, he repeatedly said his record is not as bad as it looks.
"From time to time, people plead guilty for things, for whatever reason, they did not commit,” he said of his most recent assault conviction.
"... Unfortunately, I pled guilty to that because of circumstances at that time.”
Another example, which the board members pointed out in their decision, "was that (Molloy) denied ever being imprisoned, even though he later admitted he had spent a significant period of time in jail. His justification for this denial was that he did not characterize being in ‘jail' as being in ‘prison'.”
The board's conclusion that Molloy was an unreliable witness is not new.
In 1997, an Ontario judge who was hearing a harassment case against Molloy called him a "poisonous spider”.
"I confess it is almost scary listening to this cool, collected man speaking so softly and lying through his teeth,” the judge said of Molloy's testimony.
Molloy left the Yukon after his course was cancelled, which was widely publicized in the Yukon's media.
He moved to Edmonton, where he has continued to have trouble keeping volunteer and professional positions.
The Mill Woods Presidents Council forced Molloy from its Canada Day committee following complaints about his behaviour from other volunteers, the Star has learned.
He was also ejected from two other local community leagues in the Mill Woods area of Edmonton, according to sources in that city.
He was briefly employed by the Edmonton Chamber of Commerce before being dismissed. Officials at the chamber would not say why he was let go.
Everyone the Star spoke to in the Edmonton business community asked that their names not be used in this story because, they said, they were afraid Molloy would sue them.
Comments (10)
Up 2 Down 1
Miranda Jayne Marissen on May 1, 2021 at 9:26 am
I'm not sure if anyone will see this as this is an older post but I am actually this mans dauģhter, I've never met him as he denied me as his child, he had told my mother he had a vasectomy which is why she had me at age 34 (obviously was a surprise to her). This was in 1994. He lived in a small town not far from London, Ontario called Ailsa Craig. The reason for my post is that I'm trying to connect with the other half of my blood, obviously he is no longer with us, which I didn't even know until 2018 he'd died so for two years I thought I may one day meet him not knowing he had passed.
But the thing is, he has other children, at least 4 older then me but I can't find any of them to reach out to. Sean, Adam, Caitlin & Alexandra if anyone knows them or if any one of you see this please reach out to me. I don't want anything other then some closure & to possibly meet my siblings who probably don't know I even exist. But if someone, anyone, sees this you can find me on facebook under Miranda Jayne, from St Thomas, Ontario. It's been years of me googling trying to connect to someone who knows the family!
I'm Barbara Marissens daughter & I'll be 27 in June.
Up 3 Down 0
Laurie on Oct 8, 2018 at 6:29 am
I too was violently assaulted by this man when I was 19. I met him while working at a bank in London On He came on staff and was then, cunning and charming. I had started to date him but ended as I felt pressure to move from casual dating and didn’t trust him. Two months later he broke into my apartment in the night and violently assaulted me. Last night (I’m 57 and a doctor living far away from London) I had a nightmare about him. I must say it is a relief to know he is dead. Several years ago I contacted police in Edmonton and London for the first time in more than 30 years. Adding my history may have led in a small way to his dangerous offender rating. If there is a help group for his victims, I would attend... still... 38 years later.
Up 0 Down 0
Kiernan on Dec 15, 2016 at 4:48 pm
Mr. Molloy is now deceased. He died while serving time in Bowden Institution, in Bowden Alberta.
Up 0 Down 1
Michel Dupont on Jun 17, 2011 at 1:21 am
Bobby Pitman, I could have sworn you were talking about a certain person in my own community. They are out there, aren't they?
Up 1 Down 0
Survivor on Jun 17, 2011 at 12:32 am
I am also a victim of this individual. I am sure there are many more victims. There ought to be a support group for people who are healing from his wake of destruction.
The difference between a sociopath and a psychopath is that the sociopath doesn't know the difference between right and wrong. This individual is conscious of 'every' move he makes. I'm not labeling this guy either...but if it quacks like a duck...
Up 0 Down 0
bobby bitman on Jun 15, 2011 at 11:09 pm
I am not saying this guy is a sociopath, but simply want to make an observation.
Psychopaths/sociopaths only see people as victims or enemies. They are not burdened by concerns about honesty or fairness, they simply pursue their own interests with no shame, no honour, and no remorse. They could not care less about what the truth is, it is all about winning and losing, and they think the rest of us are stupid. They cannot comprehend honour, so think it is a matter of stupidity to play a fair game when lying might get you something for nothing.
The best thing to do is to completely avoid these people, do not engage, do not think you can fix them or expect anything other than victimization from them. They made choices to become who they are, and they continue to choose their path, but they are pretty much 100% hopeless after age 18.
Good riddance. People like this should come with a warning label across their forehead, but unfortunately our society does not yet quite know how to deal with the psychopaths in our midst, and there are more of them than you might think. (Upwards of 5 people in 100 have sociopathic tendencies, would be my guess.)
Up 1 Down 0
Justice is done on Jun 15, 2011 at 7:25 am
I am glad this case was thrown out, I would be concerned in this evil mans company never mind his criminal record. There is no place for people like this in civilized society.
Up 2 Down 0
"A stronger woman than this Scumbag could handle" on Jun 12, 2011 at 10:25 pm
I am also a victim of this Scumbag who has abused, blackmailed, threatened and stolen from me. I am delighted that this case has been thrown out by the Yukon Human Rights Commission and I hope that the Authorities in the Edmonton Area are watching this perverted predator very closely.
Up 0 Down 0
My middle finger. on Jun 8, 2011 at 5:28 pm
I was and still am a victim of this a--hole. He cost me a lot of money. He lies, twists the truth, preys on innocent people's weak areas and tries to use the law and Acts against others who have a lesser knowledge of them to basically steal from them. It is good he is gone,none to soon, but too bad for those where he ended up at. It is good to see he is actually having a hard time instead of him screwing other people for a change.
Up 0 Down 0
Garcia's middle finger on Jun 8, 2011 at 6:46 am
"The first time his case was heard by the human rights board, it was dismissed because the panel found there was no evidence Molloy was employed by the government; therefore the government could not discriminate against him."
What was the panel thinking, that government discriminatory practices only exist when government employees are discriminated against?
Don't get me wrong, it's not that I necessarily disagree with the end result. But it's a good thing the reasoning (or lack thereof) behind that particular decision was not allowed to set precedence.