PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The court is currently deliberating on whether to grant the former Hedley frontman a retrial. In 2022, a Toronto jury convicted Hoggard of sexual assault causing bodily harm in connection with an incident involving an Ottawa woman. She testified that he raped her over several hours in a Toronto hotel room in 2016 when she was in her early 20s. The jury acquitted him of raping and groping a teenage fan. Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts sentenced Hoggard to five years in prison. He is currently on bail pending the outcome of this appeal. The decision may affect other cases. The prosecution also called Haskell to testify — over the defence’s objections — at last year’s trial of discredited fashion tycoon Peter Nygard. His sentencing, on four counts of sexual assault, will take place in late July.
————————————————————————
PASSAGE TWO OF THE DAY: "During his submissions Wednesday, Chan said that in Hoggard’s case, the trial judge’s repeated instructions to the jury that there’s no model victim of sexual assault and no one way for a victim to behave were sufficient to address myths and stereotypes. However, Chan argued, the introduction of Haskell’s evidence created the “overwhelming likelihood” that the jury would use it not just as a shield to guard against misplaced reasoning, “but as a sword to diagnose the complainants in this case as being victims of trauma.”
-------------------------------------------------------------
STORY: "Jacob Hoggard asks Ontario’s top court for retrial over trauma expert’s ‘unusual and highly prejudicial’ evidence," by Crime and Courts Reporter Betsy Powell, published by The Toronto Star, on July 22, 2024.
SUB-HEADING: "Prosecutors argued that the although the expert’s evidence was atypical, the trial judge was right to admit it “as an arrow pointing away from legally wrong myths” and stereotypes around sex assault."
GIST: "A Toronto judge’s decision to permit a clinical psychologist’s testimony on the “neurobiology of trauma” constituted a legal error that demands a new sex assault trial for ex-pop star Jacob Hoggard, a defence lawyer has told Ontario’s highest court.
Permitting such testimony could lead to criminal trials becoming lengthy “battles of the experts,” Gerald Chan warned a three-judge panel of the Ontario Court of Appeal on Wednesday.
The “typical division of labour” at a trial is that expert witnesses give evidence in areas that lie within their special field of expertise, the lawyer argued, while trial judges give instructions to the jury on the legal principles that ought to govern their reasoning process.
“But in this case, the trial judged mixed these two different aspects of a criminal trial together into what we say was an unusual and highly prejudicial cocktail.”
Crown attorney Catherine Weiler countered that Dr. Lori Haskell’s evidence was atypical, the trial judge was right to admit it “as an arrow pointing away from legally wrong myths” and stereotypes around sex assault, “not as an arrow pointing towards credibility or conviction.”
The court is currently deliberating on whether to grant the former Hedley frontman a retrial.
In 2022, a Toronto jury convicted Hoggard of sexual assault causing bodily harm in connection with an incident involving an Ottawa woman. She testified that he raped her over several hours in a Toronto hotel room in 2016 when she was in her early 20s. The jury acquitted him of raping and groping a teenage fan.
Superior Court Justice Gillian Roberts sentenced Hoggard to five years in prison. He is currently on bail pending the outcome of this appeal.
The decision may affect other cases. The prosecution also called Haskell to testify — over the defence’s objections — at last year’s trial of discredited fashion tycoon Peter Nygard.
His sentencing, on four counts of sexual assault, will take place in late July.
During his submissions Wednesday, Chan said that in Hoggard’s case, the trial judge’s repeated instructions to the jury that there’s no model victim of sexual assault and no one way for a victim to behave were sufficient to address myths and stereotypes. However, Chan argued, the introduction of Haskell’s evidence created the “overwhelming likelihood” that the jury would use it not just as a shield to guard against misplaced reasoning, “but as a sword to diagnose the complainants in this case as being victims of trauma.”
Exacerbating the judge’s mistake was the Crown’s closing address, which connected Haskell’s testimony to the complainants’ specific evidence, contrary to the guidelines established by the judge, Chan told Justices Paul Rouleau, Mary Lou Benotto and Julie Thorburn.
Weiler noted that in the Crown’s closing, three out of four mentions of Haskell’s testimony related to the complainant Hoggard was acquitted of raping and groping, challenging the idea that the jury misapplied Haskell’s evidence.
Several times, Thorburn questioned the prosecutor on the necessity of the expert.
“How does this evidence contribute beyond what the judge’s instructions would have addressed?” she asked.
“The aim was to bolster the jury’s capacity for discerning the truth by providing them with extra scientific rationale that might elucidate the complainants’ behaviour,” Weiler replied.
Megan Savard, the lawyer who represented Hoggard at trial, argued other grounds of appeal, including that the judge erred in admitting Hoggard’s prior discreditable conduct towards one of the complainants, which prosecutors asked the judges to reject.
Hoggard is facing another sexual assault charge in Northern Ontario in the fall."
The entire story can 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/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
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;
