Judge refuses to stay teen’s charges
Boy intends to enter guilty pleas, lawyer tells court
Police and a sheriff’s deputy breached a boy’s charter rights after he was arrested for allegedly stabbing two staff members at his Bedford high school last March, a youth court judge has ruled.
But Judge Elizabeth Buckle, in a decision Friday, refused the defence’s request for a stay of the teen’s charges, saying other steps can be taken at trial or sentencing to remedy the charter violations.
“A stay of proceedings is a rare and exceptional remedy that must only be imposed in the clearest of cases, where no other remedy is capable of redressing the prejudice,” Buckle said.
The identity of the 16-year-old boy is protected under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.
He faces 11 charges from an incident at Charles P. Allen High School on the morning of March 20, 2023: two counts each of attempted murder, aggravated assault, possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose and carrying a concealed weapon, and single counts of possession of a prohibited weapon, possession of a weapon knowing it was unauthorized and mischief.
Halifax Regional Police responded to a weapons call at the school at about 9:20 a.m. A student had stabbed a viceprincipal and an administrative assistant before fleeing the school.
The boy was arrested outside the school at about 9:30 a.m.
The employees were taken to hospital with serious injuries but were released from hospital within a few days.
The suspect, who allegedly harmed himself with a knife, was treated at hospital for non-life-threatening wounds.
The teen had a bandage on his throat when he first appeared in court March 21. The Crown gave notice that day that if the boy is convicted, it could apply to have him sentenced as an adult.
The teen pleaded not guilty to the charges last June, shortly before he was granted bail.
He was scheduled to go on trial in Halifax youth court March 18, but defence lawyers Paul Sheppard and Anna Mancini applied for a stay of proceedings in advance of the trial.
The lawyers argued in January that their client’s privacy rights were first breached by police, who remained with him while he received treatment in an ambulance and at hospital and audiorecorded about eight hours of his interactions with medical staff.
Police did not advise medical staff or the boy’s family that they were being recorded. Police also also seized the teen’s clothing without a warrant.
The defence lawyers alleged the other breach under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms happened after the boy was transported to the Spring Garden Road courthouse for a court appearance. While the teen was in a cell at the courthouse, a sheriff’s deputy photographed him and then published his picture, along with his name and the charges he was facing, in a group chat on social media.
The sheriff’s deputy lost his job and was charged with breaching publication ban provisions of the YCJA. His charge ended up being diverted to the province’s Restorative Justice Program.
Crown attorneys Terry Nickerson and Jamie Van Wart informed the court in January they would not be using the recording made by police as evidence at trial.
In her decision, the judge said there were important contextual factors to the defence application.
She said the accused, as a young person, “is legally entitled to special protections, including robust protection of his privacy that applied at the time of arrest through the trial process and beyond.
“Second, the privacy intrusions relate to health-care information and publication of (his) identity. Finally, the charges and the surrounding circumstances are very serious. … (The) charges stem from a knife attack on a vice-principal and administrative assistant at a very busy high school while school was in session.”
Buckle said she had concluded that the conduct of police in recording health-care information breached the boy’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure, and that the conduct of the sheriff’s deputy in identifying him on social media deprived him of his right to liberty and security of person.
'CONDUCT WAS OFFENSIVE'
“In considering a remedy, I have concluded that the conduct was offensive ..., should not be tolerated and harms the integrity of the justice system," the judge said. "I also concluded that there is some evidence of systemic issues that suggest at least the possibility that the conduct could continue, and the possibility that allowing the trial to proceed without remedy could further harm the integrity of the justice system.
“I have concluded that while no remedy, including a stay of proceedings, could remedy the privacy breach caused by the deputy sheriff’s actions, there are other remedies that can assist and that will redress the prejudice that is capable of redress. I’ll hear submissions from counsel at a later date on what those remedies could be. The most significant would be sentence reduction, if there is a finding of guilt.”
Sheppard then told the court that the boy intends to plead guilty to some of his charges later this month.
“I can advise that just this week the Crown and the defence have had discussions in the event that Your Honour did not impose a stay today,” Sheppard said. “It’s safe to say that we have reached a resolution.”
Van Wart said the plan is for guilty pleas to be entered March 18. He said an agreed statement of facts will be presented to the court and presentence reports ordered.