Judge’s words leave woman distraught
Complainant in sex assault case says comments about speeding up trial like a ‘punch in the stomach’
A woman who accused her stepfather of sexually assaulting her decades ago plans to file a complaint with the Canadian Judicial Council this week over controversial comments made by the B.C. Supreme Court judge presiding over her case.
The woman, whose identity is shielded by a publication ban, says she is also distraught at the conduct of Crown prosecutor Katie Bouchard, who stayed four charges against her stepfather on March 21.
Even before the 56-year-old woman took the stand in Kamloops Supreme Court to begin her testimony on March 20, Justice Peter Leask asked Bouchard to cut some of her witnesses to speed up the trial.
“Full disclosure, I live in Vancouver,” Leask said, according to Kamloops This Week reporter Tim Petruk. “Kamloops is a wonderful place, but I like sleeping in my own bed.”
Shortly after the comments, the woman took the stand as the Crown’s first witness against her stepfather, who was charged with four counts of sexually assaulting her in the 1970s when she was a teen in Adams Lake.
She said she felt Bouchard’s tone with her was harsh and she “slipped up” on one of her answers.
“I felt like I was being cross-examined. That’s what I felt like. It was just bang, bang, bang, bang, rush, rush, rush.”
She said she wasn’t prepared for some of the things the Crown asked, including about her son who committed suicide last year.
“I couldn’t believe she was bringing that up. I just went, ‘Could you please stop.’ So the judge called a recess,” the woman said, crying.
The trial was adjourned until the following day.
Bouchard told her to read over her evidence from the 2016 preliminary hearing as well as her statements to police, she said.
The woman only learned about Leask’s comments when she read Petruk’s reporting early the next day.
“I had no idea this had happened. It just felt like a punch in the stomach,” she said.
She returned to the courthouse, expecting to continue her testimony.
Instead, Bouchard told her the charges were being stayed because she no longer felt there was enough evidence.
The woman said the RCMP and the Crown who approved the charges thought there was sufficient evidence when she came forward in 2014. And a provincial court judge also determined there was enough evidence to go to trial after the preliminary hearing.
She said she has been rocked by both the Crown’s decision and Leask’s insensitive comments in court.
Crown spokesman Dan McLaughlin reiterated Monday that Leask’s comments had no bearing on the decision to drop the charges.
“The decision to stay the charges in this case was made after a full and careful review of the evidence available to the prosecutor with conduct of the file,” he said in a statement. “After reviewing this information and conferring with senior counsel … the prosecutor concluded the charge assessment standard was no longer met. In these circumstances, a stay of proceedings is the appropriate course of action.”
The woman said she should have been allowed to complete her testimony.
“They were looking for an out just to get it over with,” she said.
UBC law professor Benjamin Perrin has already filed a complaint about Leask’s comments, based on Petruk’s report of what was said in court.
Perrin said Monday that even if Leask was joking, his comments are inappropriate in any trial, let alone one about sexual assault allegations.
“It was very disturbing to me, particularly in the context that 95 per cent of sexual assault cases never get reported to police, and one of the reasons victims give is that they don’t trust the justice system,” Perrin said.
Comments like Leask’s “only serve to reinforce that message,” he said.
In 2007, Leask was censured by the judicial council for swearing during the Crown’s closing arguments in a drug case involving a Hells Angel he later acquitted.