‘Veritable virtuoso’ at delaying trial
In colourful ruling, Toronto judge blasts defendant for stalling his case beyond reasonable time limit
Steven Venditello was slapped with fraud charges more than seven years ago, but has yet to be brought to trial.
“At first blush,” Superior Court Justice Sean Dunphy said, it would certainly appear as if Venditello’s constitutional right to a trial in a reasonable time has been violated.
But on closer inspection of the facts, Dunphy concluded that much of the delay in this case was of Venditello’s own doing, as the defendant repeatedly hired, instructed, fired and rehired lawyers over the past seven years.
The Toronto judge delivered what can best be described as a blistering, yet colourful, ruling dismissing Venditello’s application for his charges to be stayed.
“Mr. Venditello has proved himself a veritable virtuoso at exploiting the fervent desire of the justice system to facilitate his right to counsel to create delay for his own ends,” Dunphy wrote in a decision re- leased last week.
“In the interim, the main complainant has fallen ill and died. Even a peremptory ‘with or without counsel’ trial date was not proof against the stratagems of this defendant who, thus far, has avoided trial with all the determination of a cat fleeing a bath.”
In the wake of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v. Jordan, which set strict timelines to bring an accused person to trial, the justice system has been subjected to heightened public scrutiny to ensure that charges aren’t stayed due to delay.
The Jordan ruling found that cases that take longer than 30 months in Superior Court — between the time when a person is charged and the anticipated end of their trial — are presumptively unreasonable.
In such cases it falls on the Crown to prove there were exceptional circumstances for the delay.
Dunphy’s decision serves as a reminder that just because the time limit set by Jordan has been breached, it doesn’t necessarily mean the case is over.
“The court in Jordan sought to change a culture of complacency not gullibility,” Dunphy wrote.
“The latter may well need addressing as well, but only in an Alice in Wonderland world can the pursuit of justice be advanced by its denial. The Charter (of Rights and Freedoms) will not long stand as a publicly cherished bulwark of fundamental rights and freedoms if it is permitted to be exploited and indeed perverted to secure ends utterly disconnected from those of justice.
“In this case, the right to counsel has been skilfully manipulated to attempt to create a simulacrum of unreasonable delay. There is no doubt in my mind that this defendant has never sought to have his day in court.”
Venditello was charged in November 2009 with fraud over $5,000, related to allegations of defrauding an elderly couple of approximately $340,000, according to Dunphy’s decision.
His initial court appearance was in January 2010.
The next seven years would see a series of lawyers from different firms shuffle through Toronto courtrooms on Venditello’s behalf — and sometimes Venditello would show up unrepresented — leading to more than 60 court appearances in a case which has yet to go to trial. (Dunphy said the trial is now finally set for July.)
“The revolving door of Mr. Venditello’s legal representation had not ceased to revolve,” Dunphy wrote.
One of those lawyers was Gary Batasar, who told the Star he has represented Venditello on other criminal matters and appeared for him in the early stages of the fraud case, but was not ultimately retained for the trial.
“I’ve known him for 15-20 years, when he was dealing with me, he’s always been able to retain me, and we’ve dealt with his cases. This was one where I think he’d fallen on hard times, and wasn’t able to afford to retain me, and then he ended up going to other counsel,” Batasar said.
“I think he may have utilized my familiarity with him to his advantage.”
“In this case, the right to counsel has been skilfully manipulated to attempt to create a simulacrum of unreasonable delay.”
JUSTICE SEAN DUNPHY IN WRITTEN RULING
Batasar’s appearances and disappearances from the file between 2010 and 2013 led Dunphy to describe him as the “Scarlet Pimpernel,” the literary figure who rescued aristocrats from getting killed during the French Revolution.
Venditello’s current lawyer, John Christie, told the Star a major reason for the delay was permitting yet another lawyer to remove himself as counsel of record in 2013 because he was going to start a new job outside the province.
Christie also said it’s up to other players in the justice system as well to ensure that the case is progressing and that court dates are being scheduled accordingly. “What was needed was someone from the Crown’s office to call b------- on Mr. Venditello and say, ‘Your case is now two years old, you’re going to come back tomorrow, and we’re going to figure out how much time this is going to take, and you’re going to set a (preliminary inquiry).’ ”
Christie said he intends to appeal Dunphy’s ruling.