SHOULD JUDGES BE ALLOWED TO CRY?

Defence claims ‘overall tone of bias’ in sex trial

KELOWNA, B.C. •Ajudge who cried during a victimimpact statement is incapable of delivering a fair sentence, a defence lawyer said.

Judge Monica McParland is also accused of scoffing at the defence’s suggestion for an intermittent jail sentence and displaying an “overall tone of bias” against a person who pleaded guilty to the sexual interference of a minor.

“It is not appropriate for a judge to get so emotional during a victim-impact statement, period,” defence lawyer Jacqueline Halliburn said. “Judges don’t cry in every sexual-interference case.”

Jeremy Melvin Carlson was charged in 2016 with sexual assault and sexual interference of a person under age 16. Carlson, who is now in the process of transitioning to become a woman, subsequently pleaded guilty to sexual interference of a minor.

According to a report of the trial by Infotel.ca, McParland wiped tears from her eyes as the victim’s mother read a statement to the court in April.

“I feel like I have completely failed my daughter as I was not able to protect my baby,” read the statement.

Her daughter had “lost her childhood innocence and her concept of a safe world. This is something … I cannot repair.”

The Kelowna Daily Courier said the statement added, “As a result of this trauma, (my daughter) continues to have nightmares. (She) does not feel comfortable walking to school alone or with her siblings … She fears being in public places because she does not want to run into the offender.”

However, Crown prosecutor Angela Ross said the judge’s actions fell well below the standard of misconduct required for an application of judicial recusal to be granted.

“Even gross discourtesy does not amount to judicial error,” Ross said.

As well, Ross said, judges are expected to demonstrate “compassion and humanity” in the fulfilment of their duties.

McParland herself will decide if she should quit the case and refer sentencing to another judge.

After Crown and defence arguments were made, McParland indicated that decision will come before the end of August.

The Crown wants a jail sentence up to 20 months, followed by two years of probation.

The defence suggested a 90-day intermittent jail term, to be served over 20 weekends.

The judge’s response when Halliburn proposed that lighter sentence is a matter of dispute. Halliburn described it as a “short, sharp scoff,” but the Crown said no such response is audible on court recordings where it’s alleged to have occurred.