Pre-trial scheduled

Share Button

Just home. 

Bishop Raymond Lahey did not appear in Ottawa court`s courtroom 5 today.  He is however scheduled for pre-trial at 2:40 pm 26 January 2010, and a continuance at 8:30 am 03 February 2010.

And no, not Justice Colin McKinnon on the bench 🙂

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)   

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Pre-trial scheduled

  1. AbsentObserver says:

    Whenever and however this goes to court, it’s unlikely McKinnon would be able to hear the case. Possession of child pornography charges are almost always dealt with the in the lower Ontario courts and McKinnon is a superior court judge. The only thing I can think of that would bump it up into McKinnon’s jurisdiction would be if the Crown is successful in moving forward with the more serious charge of importation. But even if that charge stands, it’s likely it’ll be dealt with at the Ontario court level. Odds are Edelson is going to try to have the importation charge tossed and perhaps arrange for Lahey to plead to the possession charge. Guess we’ll have to wait and see.

    To view the names of judges who hear cases in the east region in the Ontario courts, visit this link … http://www.ontariocourts.on.ca/ocj/en/judges/index.htm#E

  2. Sylvia says:

    Perhaps they could pull Lennox back in? 🙂 🙂

    Do you know anything about continuances AbsentObserver? Lahey’s court date if 03 February is a continuance. From what I can see a continuance is a request for a postponement. I don’t see how a continuance on the 3rd marries with media talk of a plea on the 3rd.

    Could he enter a plea AND request a postponement on the 3rd? It doesn’t make sense to me. And the 3rd was very definitively identified as a continuance – at 8:30 am.

    How would he know now that he wants to request a postponement on the 3rd of February when he is having a judicial pretrial on the 26th of January and presumably has no idea how that will go?

    Can you help me sort this out?

  3. AbsentObserver says:

    If Lahey indeed enters a plea on Feb. 3, here’s how it will likely go down.

    The court clerk will read the charges aloud. Lahey will be asked how he pleads to each charge and he will have to say aloud guilty or not guilty to each one. A plea indicates he will admit guilt to the charges.
    The Crown will then read what is called an agreed statement of facts. This is evidence about the offence necessary to support a conviction which both the Crown and defence agreed is fair representation of the offence itself.
    Following the reading of the agreed statement of facts (it’s also possible it won’t be read aloud in court but instead given to the judge in written form.) The judge will then either convict Lahey based on the evidence as presented through the agreed statement of facts or find there is not enough evidence to convict him. I don’t think the latter will be the case. Once both sides agree to the evidence and the accused announces his or her guilt, a judge will almost certainly convict every time.
    Once the conviction is registered, a number of things will happen. A discussion will be held about setting an appearance date for a sentencing hearing. This discussion will include talk about what must be accomplished prior to the sentencing hearing. In nearly every case, either the Crown or the defence will request a pre-sentence report be provided to the court. This means Lahey will be interviewed by a probation officer in order to provide the court with information about Lahey’s past, who he is, information about the offence, etc. The probation officer will also likely include an opinion as to whether Lahey should be jailed or could be permitted to serve a conditional jail sentence in the community (similar to house arrest with conditions.) There will also be information about Lahey’s understanding (or lack thereof) of the criminality of his actions and the probation officer may give an opinion about whether or not Lahey is likely to reoffend in the future.
    Also at the plea hearing there may be some discussion about whether or not he may face real jail time and whether the Crown will seek to have him taken into custody immediately following the plea. Sometimes the Crown does this for several reasons: there could be a concern the accused may not appear for sentencing or the accused may be facing such a substantial jail term it’s reasonable for him or her to begin serving time right away.
    These are all reasons why you heard them talk about a “continuance.” The fact that Lahey may enter a plea on Feb. 3 does not mean the case comes to an end that day. There’s still much more to do. They will need to set future dates for the sentencing aspects of the case.

    Hope this helps you understand things a little more.

    By the way … an agreed statement of facts becomes a part of the court record of the hearing no matter how they’re presented to the court. If the Crown reads them aloud and you’re there, obviously you can hear the evidence for yourself. If they’re not read aloud but instead provided in writing to the judge, you can request a copy.

    Just so you know.

    🙂

  4. Sylvia says:

    Thank you thank you AbsentObserver. Very much appreciated.

    I will do what I can to be there in the 3rd so that IF it`s a guilty plea I can catch the agreed statement of facts.

    I`m still not clear on continuance but probably will sort that out as I watch things unfold.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *