BACKGROUND: "Jacob William Hoggard is a Canadian former musician who was the lead singer for the pop-rock band Hedley. Before Hedley was formed, Hoggard competed on the second season of Canadian Idol in 2004 when he placed third. In 2018, Hoggard was arrested and charged with sexual assault." (Wikipedia);
-------------------------------------------------------------
PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "A decision in the case could have implications for others, as the Crown has called on Haskell in at least one other high-profile sexual assault case, again over the defence’s objections: she testified last year at the trial of disgraced fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who is awaiting sentencing after being convicted by a jury of sexually assaulting four women. At the Hoggard trial, Haskell was allowed to testify about the “neurobiology of trauma,” as long as it wasn’t linked to the two complainants, neither of whom she had assessed. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Haskell told the jury about how “experiencing a traumatic event can cause memory to fragment and lack coherent narrative,” according to Hoggard’s appeal submission. Roberts believed the testimony would help the jury better understand her instructions on avoiding myths and stereotypes in sexual assault cases. Hoggard’s lawyers say that the judge’s instructions alone are sufficient. And they argue that the jury placed “undue focus” on Haskell’s testimony, which became apparent during deliberations when the jury came back with questions trying to tie Haskell’s testimony about general concepts to the specific case against Hoggard."
------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Trauma expert’s ‘irrelevant’ testimony tainted my sex assault trial," Hedley’s Jacob Hoggard argues in appeal," by Courts and Justice Reporter Jacques Gallant, published by The Toronto Star, on January 24, 2024. (Jacques Gallant is a Toronto-based reporter covering courts, justice and legal affairs for the Star.)
SUB-HEADING: "A psychologist’s testimony on trauma at Jacob Hoggard’s Toronto sexual assault trial was so irrelevant and unnecessary that it caused an unfair trial, the ex-Hedley frontman’s lawyers argue in new appeal filings."
GIST: "A psychologist’s testimony on trauma at Jacob Hoggard’s Toronto sexual assault trial was so irrelevant and unnecessary that it caused an unfair trial, the ex-Hedley frontman’s lawyers argue in new appeal filings.
Hoggard was convicted by a jury in 2022 of sexual assault causing bodily harm in relation to an Ottawa woman who testified he raped her over several hours in a Toronto hotel room in 2016, when she was in her early 20s. She said Hoggard also slapped and choked her, and described bleeding afterward. The jury acquitted Hoggard of raping and groping another complainant, a teenage fan.
Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts sentenced Hoggard to five years in prison in October 2022, but he has been out on bail pending the outcome of his appeal.
In their written arguments filed with the Ontario Court of Appeal this month, Hoggard’s lawyers push for a new trial by mostly focusing on the Crown’s first witness, clinical psychologist Lori Haskell. They argue that Roberts’ decision to allow Haskell to testify tainted the trial’s fairness.
The Crown has until five weeks before the hearing date to file its response to the appeal; a date has not yet been set.
A decision in the case could have implications for others, as the Crown has called on Haskell in at least one other high-profile sexual assault case, again over the defence’s objections: she testified last year at the trial of disgraced fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who is awaiting sentencing after being convicted by a jury of sexually assaulting four women.
At the Hoggard trial, Haskell was allowed to testify about the “neurobiology of trauma,” as long as it wasn’t linked to the two complainants, neither of whom she had assessed. Using a PowerPoint presentation, Haskell told the jury about how “experiencing a traumatic event can cause memory to fragment and lack coherent narrative,” according to Hoggard’s appeal submission.
Roberts believed the testimony would help the jury better understand her instructions on avoiding myths and stereotypes in sexual assault cases.
Hoggard’s lawyers say that the judge’s instructions alone are sufficient. And they argue that the jury placed “undue focus” on Haskell’s testimony, which became apparent during deliberations when the jury came back with questions trying to tie Haskell’s testimony about general concepts to the specific case against Hoggard.
Roberts refused the jury’s request for a read-back of Haskell’s testimony, telling them not to use it “to explain the particular evidence in this case.” In the jury’s absence, she told the lawyers: “Frankly the fact that they want to hear (Haskell’s) evidence again concerns me because it shouldn’t be playing a major role in their decision.”
Hoggard’s lawyers argue that Roberts’ “reluctance to let the jury rehear evidence she had admitted illustrates its toxic potential and the unreasonableness of admitting it.”
His appeal team includes his trial lawyer Megan Savard, and Arash Ghiassi from the same firm, Savard Foy, along with Gerald Chan and Spencer Bass from law firm Stockwoods.
Haskell’s testimony at the beginning of the trial would have inevitably led the jury to start with the assumption that a traumatic event had definitely occurred in the case, which “subtly eroded the presumption of innocence,” the lawyers say. “Unless the jury assumed Hoggard was guilty, Dr. Haskell’s evidence was irrelevant.”
And if Haskell’s testimony was in fact necessary, then an expert or multiple experts would be required in practically every criminal case dealing with trauma, the lawyers argue, which would add to the length and cost of proceedings.
“By dressing up common sense with the cloak of expertise, Dr. Haskell’s evidence risked overwhelming the jury’s deliberation process,” Hoggard’s lawyers argue.
“Juries do not need science lessons on familiar phenomena like the fight, flight, and freeze reactions described by Dr. Haskell. Admitting such evidence usurps their role. Juries are trusted to draw conclusions about high-stress, life-or-death scenarios based on life experience and common sense.”
The entire story ca be read at:
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog; |
SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/47049136857587929
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices.
Lawyer Radha Natarajan;
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
------------------------------------------------------------------
YET ANOTHER FINAL WORD:
David Hammond, one of Broadwater's attorneys who sought his exoneration, told the Syracuse Post-Standard, "Sprinkle some junk science onto a faulty identification, and it's the perfect recipe for a wrongful conviction.
https://deadline.com/2021/11/alice-sebold-lucky-rape-conviction-overturned-anthony-broadwater-12348801
-----------------------------------------------------------------
