Father Amer Saka has a court date tomorrow morning:
02 February 2017: 09:30 am, “to be spoken to,” courtroom #5, London Ontario courthouse ( 80 Dundas St.)
Father Saka is a priest Chaldean Catholic Church in Canada facing charges of fraud over $5,000 and possessing proceeds of property or thing exceeding $5,000. Police will say only that the total sum of money ‘lost’ was in excess of $500,000.
*****
There is no new court date as yet for Nathan Labatt on his Humboldt, Saskatchewan charged.
Labatt, a former Boy Scout leader and youth volunteer with Archdiocese of Regina, Saskatchewan Youth Ministry, is facing child porn related charges in three Saskatchewan jurisdictions. He has gone to trial on the Kamsack charges (decision 32 March ’17). has a prleimianr y hearing scheduled on the Regina Charges 817-29 March ’17), and, after a preliminary hearing last December, was committed to stand trial in the Saskatchewan Court of Queen’s Bench on the Humboldt charges. As I say, at this time there is no upcoming court date set. Labatt is not on the roster for the 03 February 2017 pre-trials which, in that jurisdiction where pre-trial are held monthly, means the earliest date which could be set would be early March. There may be news before 03 March. I will check again mid month.
Please keep the complainant in your prayers.
*****
Brent Hawkes was found not guilty:
31 January 2017: “Toronto pastor Brent Hawkes found not guilty” & related articles
The judges ruling has not yet been posted. It should be available within the next week or two. Once available it will be posted. I prefer to read the decision before commenting, however, I will draw attention to the following excerpt from the CBC 31 January article “Toronto pastor Brent Hawkes found not guilty of sex crimes in Nova Scotia”:
In his decision, [Justice] Tufts said a “great deal” of Hawkes’s testimony at trial was contradicted by other witnesses and he did not believe the accused.
But while there was a “likelihood or even a probability” that some sexual activity happened in the bedroom, the judge said he was not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.
He said the complainant was intoxicated that night, and his testimony did not add up in key places with that of two witnesses and other evidence.
“We simply do not know how much is his true memory of what he actually recalled as opposed to what he may have recreated or reconstructed,” Tufts said.
“I say this with the greatest respect to [the complainant] because I do not want to diminish the real pain I witnessed when he testified.”
So, the judge, amongst other things, and according to media reports: did not believe Hawkes; believed that there was a likelihood “or even a probability” that some sexual activity happened in the bedroom, and; does not want to diminish “the real pain” he, the judge, witnessed when the complainant testified.
I am anxious to read the decision verbatim.
I do hope and pray the Crown appeals.
Please keep the complainant in your prayers.
Enough for now,
Sylvia