Oakes sues police, Crown
Lawyer for woman once convicted of murder before it was overturned says his client deserves $1 million for her poor treatment throughout judicial process
Connie Oakes is suing Medicine Hat police and the Crown for $1 million over her arrest, prosecution and imprisonment for the 2011 murder of Casey Armstrong.
Papers filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench on April 27 allege the police and Crown “participated in procuring a wrongful imprisonment and a wrongful conviction” of Oakes. Their conduct was a “malicious exercise of authority ... (and) ... constitutes an abuse of authority, was highhanded and malicious, and warrants an award of aggravated and punitive damages.”
Oakes and coaccused Wendy Scott were charged with firstdegree murder for the stabbing death of Armstrong in 2011.
Oakes was found guilty of second-degree murder in 2013 by a jury, and sentenced to life in prison with no eligibility for parole for 14 years. This decision was overturned in April 2016 by the Court of Appeal,
Scott pled guilty to seconddegree murder and testified against Oakes. Her testimony was the only direct evidence linking Oakes to the murder, and she was later deemed to be unreliable due to low cognitive abilities and her testimony’s inconsistency. No DNA, fingerprints or any other physical evidence were presented at the trial. Scott later recanted her testimony.
Scott was sentenced in November 2012 to life in prison with no eligibility for parole for 10 years. This plea was also overturned and a new trial ordered.
Charges against both were stayed by the Crown.
“This was a travesty of justice, for not only my client Connie Oakes, but Wendy Scott,” said Edmonton-based lawyer Thomas Engel
“This was an investigation and prosecution that was completely infected by tunnel vision, and tunnel vision has been responsible for many people going to jail in Canada and elsewhere when they’re innocent.”
Canadian Senator Kim Pate has called for a public inquiry into the handling of the homicide, and Engel agrees there should be one alongside the lawsuit.
“A public inquiry is not going to do anything to compensate Connie Oakes,” he said. “I think it’s important that she get some kind of vindication and compensation. That’s what a lawsuit is for.”
Nine officers are named in the suit, including police chief Andy McGrogan.
“They’re allegations in a lawsuit, anybody can sue anybody, and basically it’s before the courts now. I’m confidant in the work that our police service did, and let’s just let everything fall where it may,” McGrogan said, and that allegations in the lawsuit have been “hashed over by a number of different public bodies.”
“I’ve reviewed the file. I think that we did a good job on this file, and we’ll let the courts determine at this stage now what’s next and if there’s any culpability.”
Lawsuits are not uncommon for police, said McGrogan, and there are currently around 10 outstanding ones against MHPS.
City of Medicine Hat lawyers and insurers will be responding to the lawsuit on behalf of the officers named.
If a negative finding against police is found, the city or its insurer is liable.
The lawsuit documents allege that Oakes’s charter rights were breached throughout the investigation and trial.
Allegations include negligence by police in dealing with Scott, and using “interrogation tactics, which should not have been used on a person of normal intellectual and psychological abilities, let alone a person who was obviously as vulnerable as Scott.”
The suit also alleges that when alibi notice was provided by defence, officers “negligently and deliberately deterred witnesses who would have supported that alibi from providing evidence in support of the alibi, and they did so in order to pursue their tunnel vision investigation.” This “tunnel vision” meant police negligently failed to properly pursue other possible leads and suspects named by Scott, documents allege.
MHPS failed to disclose all information that could be relevant in relation to their contacts and communications with Scott, the lawsuit says, or alternatively failed to collect and preserve that evidence. It also claims the MHPS led Scott to the crime scene and then falsely claimed Scott had done so.
The suit alleges that Crown Prosecutor Andrea Dolan (now Pocha-Robbenhaar) made “inflammatory and obviously improper representations to the jury,” including “significantly misleading” statements in her closing argument about the testimony Scott gave during her own guilty plea.
Because of this, the suit claims Oakes was unlawfully imprisoned, prosecuted and convicted, and incarcerated in a federal penitentiary where she suffered harsh conditions. She suffered painful injuries both physical and psychological, and suffers from anxiety and depression.
“As this case is before the courts, it would be inappropriate to comment,” was the statement issued by the Justice and Solicitor General Ministry, when contacted by the News for comment.