Case closed
Judge retires to consider verdict in Charlottetown trial
New information has led a prosecutor to not pursue two of six charges levelled against a Charlottetown army reserve captain.
Prosecutor Maj. M.E. Leblond Monday requested a military court judge reach not guilty verdicts against Capt. Todd Bannister on charges stemming from an incident where Bannister, while serving as commanding officer of the 148 Charlottetown Royal Canadian Army Cadet Corps, allegedly made a crude comment to a female cadet about her breasts.
Military defence lawyer Maj. J.L.P.L. Boutin contends a female with a grudge towards Bannister spearheaded the complaint as an act of revenge.
“The military police conducted a thorough investigation into the new information, and based on the results of that investigation, the prosecution has assessed there is no longer a reasonable prospect of conviction as it relates to the fifth charge, behaved in a disgraceful manner, and the sixth charge, conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline,’’ Capt. Liam Mather, public affairs officer with Regional Cadet Support Unit (Atlantic), said in a statement.
“Uncovering of new information — even during a trial — is not unusual, and prosecutors have a continuing obligation throughout the entire trial process to review all available information and assess their reasonable prospect of conviction.’’
Leblond closed her case Tuesday morning against Bannister in a court martial trial that began Jan. 15 and has been hampered by delays and adjournments.
Bannister still faces four charges stemming from two incidents involving former female cadet Breanna MacKinnon.
In one incident, Bannister is alleged to have made a vulgar proposition for the former cadet to engage in sexual intercourse. He is also accused of making the same request to the same woman on a separate occasion.
Boutin made a motion to the court that the arguments made by the prosecution during the trial were not relevant based on the laws at the time the incidents occurred.
In her closing argument, Leblond called Bannister’s behaviour “shockingly unacceptable.’’
Boutin never directly challenged in court whether Bannister made the offensive comments to MacKinnon.
Rather, he told the judge he leaves it to the court to determine whether or not MacKinnon was a credible and reliable witness.
However, Boutin is relying on Judge Lt.-Col. Louis-Vincent d’Auteuil to find that the prosecutor’s arguments “were well off the mark.’’
Boutin also argued that Leblond failed in applying criminal law standards, which he called “a pretty high threshold’’, to the alleged actions of Bannister.
“The prosecution has fallen significantly short to prove each essential element,’’ he said.
D’Auteuil plans to render his verdict late next week on the four charges, which include one count of behaving in a disgraceful manner and one count of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline for both the first and second incident.
Bannister can only be convicted of one of the two different charges in each incident.
Conviction of behaving in a disgraceful manner carries a maximum sentence of five years in jail but could result in a fine, reduction in rank or dismissal from the Armed Forces.
The maximum penalty for a conviction of conduct to the prejudice of good order and discipline is dismissal with disgrace.