Closing arguments made at firefighter’s trial
Defence describes complainant as ‘obsessed and delusional’; Crown says accused’s version of events is ‘ridiculous’
Closing submissions in the trial of St. John’s firefighter George Pottle wrapped up Thursday, Oct. 14, with Crown and defence lawyers arguing each other’s evidence was too ludicrous to accept.
Pottle, 46, has pleaded not guilty to charges of assault causing bodily harm, assault with a weapon and uttering threats against his ex-girlfriend in April 2018.
Pottle’s ex-partner testified he attacked her in their home, belitting and threatening her, grabbing her by the throat, throwing tools and beer bottles at her and breaking her nose by head-butting her. She told the court Pottle had been drinking and broke down the bathroom door to get to her and threw her cellphone in the toilet, and grabbed her neck again the next morning when she attempted to pour his beer down the kitchen sink. The court saw photos of the woman’s injuries and of her blood in the home and garage.
Pottle described having returned home from work on the morning in question and arguing with his girlfriend, who accused him, as she often had, of cheating on her. They spent most of the day drinking and arguing before the woman’s anger escalated, he testified, and she threw a rock at his head, threatened him with a wrench, smashed an ipad and beer bottles, attacked a 10-year-old child in the home and stole the child’s laptop. Pottle said the woman held a BB gun to his head after he took her cellphone, and he and the child spent the night in a bedroom with furniture pushed against the door to keep the woman out.
Pottle said the woman’s nose had been injured accidentally in a struggle over the wrench. He got the gun away from her and hid it in the basement, he said, where it remained until his trial.
In his closing submissions, defence lawyer Bob Buckingham suggested there had been no evidence to corroborate the complainant’s testimony, and existing evidence contradicted her allegations. It was implausible, he argued, that Pottle had broken the woman’s nose yet she stayed talking with him in their garage for hours. Her testimony that she had been “loving and caring” toward the child minutes after smashing his ipad didn’t make sense, Buckingham said.
Buckingham had focused much of his cross-examination on a series of texts the woman had exchanged with Pottle 10 days before the alleged assaults, accusing him of cheating on her, indicating she was suicidal and had a gun and was planning to bring it to the other woman’s house. The complainant ended up in hospital after the texts, Buckingham said, where she received psychiatric care.
Buckingham suggested the complainant had grown increasingly upset over her belief in Pottle’s infidelity on the day of the alleged assaults, becoming obsessed and delusional over them, telling him at one point the other woman was parked at the bottom of their driveway.
“The evidence, I submit to you, is (the complainant) was out of control of her own thoughts and actions that evening,” Buckingham said.
“She was the one being aggressive that night, she’s the one who had the gun, she’s the one who smashed the ipad.”
The child, now 14, testified for the defence, saying the woman had attacked him and pinned him up against a wall.
Prosecutor Jeff Summers argued the child’s evidence had been clearly directed to support Pottle, pointing out the boy had opened his testimony by saying, unprompted, Pottle was “a great man.” He had been able to recall some details in specifics, Summers noted, but had testified that he couldn’t remember if the woman had been injured and could not recall seeing blood in the home or garage. He had potentially overheard Pottle speaking about the incident multiple times since it happened, Summers said.
Summers questioned Pottle’s decision not to call for help after the child was attacked and they were confined to a bedroom. Pottle also never mentioned the attack on the child when he later gave a statement to police about the stolen laptop, the procecutor said. He noted Pottle had testified he never told police about the woman assaulting the boy because he didn’t want to cause the boy further trauma, yet he had called the boy to testify at trial.
“It is one thing for him to observe his right to silence. It is quite another to sit on evidence regarding allegations of criminal conduct by another person — especially when he has already given evidence regarding theft on the same night — including assaults against (the child),” Summers said.
Summers took issue with the defence’s use of the text message exchange, describing it as “gratutitious allegations of her background, mental health and drug use” presented to paint Pottle and the child as victims of a “raging monster.”
“By asking the court to look at events on a prior date and issues with her mental health, they are essentially saying, “Look, she’s doing it again,” Summers argued.
Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court Justice Donald Burrage will return Nov. 4 with his decision.