Hugues Latour has been charged with 7 offences
CBC News
Posted: Oct 13, 2011 7:23 PM CT
Last Updated: Oct 13, 2011 9:27 PM CT
Former Inuvik teacher Hugues Latour, pictured here in January 2009 in Inuvik, N.W.T., faces charges of possession of child pornography and sexual assault. (Philippe Morin/CBC)
Hugues Latour, 38, faces charges of touching of a minor for a sexual purpose, sexual assault, assault and unlawful confinement stemming from a recent incident.
He also faces charges of possessing child pornography and of making child pornography.
Latour also faces one count of failing to comply with the conditions of his recognizance.
Police believe the offences happened recently.
After getting a search warrant, police say they found disturbing pictures and videos. The RCMP is now going through his computer and other possessions.
Latour, who is originally from Quebec, is a former high school teacher – someone who worked with teenagers. He worked at Samuel Hearne Secondary School for only one or two years.
The Beaufort Delta Education Council has declined to comment. However, police say they don’t believe the alleged offences happened while Latour was a teacher.
RCMP Staff Sgt. Wayne Norris says parents should talk with their children about the case.
“With these charges and this person in custody, all I need to stress is that if anyone else is aware of someone who is a victim like this, to report it to the RCMP,” said Norris.
Latour is in police custody and is scheduled to appear in court on Friday in Inuvik.
______________________________
New to the North
Northern News Services
Dez Loreen
Inuvik – Hughes Latour has only been in Inuvik for a few weeks, but he already knows he will enjoy his time in the region.
Latour is a French teacher from Montreal, who is also a filmmaker. He arrived in Inuvik at the end of August and is teaching Grade 5 and 6 French immersion.
Hughes Latour is a new teacher at Sir Alexander Mackenzie School. He is from Montreal and is teaching the Grade 5/6 French immersion class. He said he enjoys teaching with his new class and looks forward to a good year. – Dez Loreen/NNSL photo
|
“I spent some time walking around, seeing sights and meeting people,” said Latour.
Latour said that he came up with his girlfriend, who also works at the school as a French monitor.
Latour is also involved with a film company he started back in Montreal.
“I have split my time between film and teaching in the past, but I am a full time teacher here,” he said.
“Working with film is fun, but I love to teach.”
Coming to the North was something that Latour wanted to do, to document different places in Canada.
“That is a big reason why I came North,” he said.
He packed light though, as he said he prefers to rent equipment from local sources rather than pack it all during his travels.
It was back in 1997 that Latour received his qualifications to teach.
Since then he has been across Canada with teaching gigs, learning more about the country.
The French immersion program at SAM school is based around the idea that a student stays in the program throughout their years at Sir Alex.
Latour explained that all of his students have been enrolled in the program since Grade 1.
“You cannot jump in and out, you start early and finish through Grade 6,” said Latour.
He said that he was impressed with the students in his class.
“French is a second language here and there isn’t a place to speak it outside of school, so it’s good to see the progress of the students here,” he said.
The first week of school was interesting for Latour.
“There is a different method and system here, which is something that I am getting used to,” said Latour.
When he first stepped into his class, the first thing he aimed to do was assess where his students were at with their studies.
“It’s been busy, learning the kids names and getting to know them,” he said.
“It’s been exciting.”
Latour said that he was happy to be in Inuvik.
“My girlfriend used to work in Fort Smith, she told me we should move here,” he said.
Latour said that like most new teachers, he found his information from the internet.
“I did some research on Inuvik and what it looks like here,” he said.
“It’s one thing to read about it and another to actually be here.”
Latour said he thought Inuvik was going to be smaller.
“There is so much to do here, with a lot of nice people.”
Latour said that he wants to experience as much as he can while he is in the North.
“I came here to teach, but to learn as well, we are all students in life,” he said.
According to the second article from 2007 Latour spent ten years (1997-2007) travelling Canada with various “teachings gigs.” I wonder which schools he taught at in those ten years?
Note that Latour’s first name is spelled in these articles as both Hughes and Hugues. I have no idea which is correct.
He is a very good and decent teacher!
Hugues is how you spell his real name. He worked at Sir alexander and then the high school for 2 years.
Impregnated [name edited by Sylvia], i believe she was still in high school at the time(thoug i may be wrong)
Dont say thing you dont know anythign about. There were never a student involved.
Millet, I edited out the name. I don’t know if this individual has spoken out publicly – of she has not yet spoken out publicly I believe it is inappropriate to identify her by name.
Good call, Sylvia.
Please remove this entry. It was a setup and all charges have been removed.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/north/story/2013/08/30/north-latour-charges-stayed.html
The charges were stayed Steeve, not removed. Note the following in the CBC news article:
“… a judge has ordered that alledged video evidence seized in the case be destroyed.”
“A stay of proceedings is not a finding of guilt or innocence.
“The charges could be prosecuted at a later date if new evidence is presented.”
There were NEVER videos. The CBC have it wrong. This was a setup all along. Dont pretend to know things you dont. REMOVE the entry.
First you post the CBC article to support your claim….and then you say the CBC got it wrong?
They changed their article and added the alledge video thing. If you had a brain you would realise that it does not make sense. If there are videos, charges would not be droped. And there are no videos, I know this for a fact.
Since I am the one who was falsy accused and I know the truth I can assure you there were never any video and it was all a lie from a vicious, horrible person. I asked the CBC to remove their entry about ‘alleged videos’ because there are no videos at all.
Steeve,
I’ve been following your comments here for a few days… and I must say that I find your comments condescending, smug, and even a bit paranoid! It’s one thing to state your point of view – it’s quite another to accuse another of being brainless (your statement below to 1yellowknife).
The latest article on CBC (updated today!) states “Furthermore, a judge has ordered that alledged video evidence seized in the case be destroyed.” Sounds like there were videos AT SOME POINT!
Settle down! Argue your point like a grown-up. And stop insulting others here who mostly come to find support and understanding after being abused as kids!
jj
Here is the CBC article which I saw yesterday and which is still online today:
And here is an article from 13 August 2013:
There were never any videos. I am the one who was falsely accused. A total setup. I asked CBC to remove their entry that is wrong. A lot of what media reported is wrong. And by thwe way, ALL charges (15 all together) are gone. NONE were true. Including the ridiculus first charges that a bad judge found me guilty (assault). The same crown decide NOT to have a new trial because it involes the same monster who accused my of all those fals echagres. 15 all together.
After seeing Sylvia’s correction, I concur that CBC “incorrectly reported that there was alleged video evidence seized in the case that the judge ordered to be destroyed” (CBC).
My advice to Mr Latour is to refrain from coming on a blog such as this using an obvious pseudonym (Steeve Davenport) to deceive others, to falsely represent himself, to then divulge his “true identity” (maybe – anyone could fake it – he just did!!!) to scream “I’ll sue you!” at everyone who dares to question his motives, and to insult readers and bloggers ad nauseum. This hardly won him empathy with me, regardless of his circumstances…
Get some help managing that anger… It couldn’t hurt!
jj
Right on, Sylvia.
What the hell do you think you know about this case? you know nothing at all!
Stayed charges can be “brought back to life” within one year of the day they are stayed. So if he is charged with new offence(s) during the one year period, the stayed charges could be brought back and the Crown could prosecute him on those same charges again.
There was never any offence! This is just a general rule in th ecriminal code. It means nothing for this. The crown slayed the charges because there is NO case, there were NO crimes. It was in fact a setup. He was the victim, and the person behind all this is the mother of his child, a drunk drug addict.
You seem to know a lot about this case…what relation are you to this collar? Also, if it was a setup, why has the person not been charged? You’d better watch what YOU say, your statements sound just as suspicious.
Be carefull at what you say. I am the one who was falsely accused and there were never any videos. It was all a lie set up by a vicious person. I am the one who was falsely accused. And I am not the only one that was a victim like that. A lawyer in Inuvik had similar false accusations 5 years ago but the mother of his child. He was, of course, all clear of those charges. But he live a year of hell. The know up there that the RCMP are easyly manipulated. Just lay charges without proof and you get arrested. But the RCMP did a lot worst and law suit are being prepared agaisnt them. That is for another case.
Hugues: My comments were addressed to Steeve, not to you so back off. I also commented to Steeve that if the person had made false allegations, the RCMP would have laid charges against them…has that happened yet? Why not?? Maybe because there is more to this than all are saying. I’m sorry for you if what you’re saying is the truth and that you have been falsely accused…nobody wants to have to go through that. Meanwhile, I take offense to what Steeve was saying because he was being ignorant and derogatory to 1yellowknife..he has no right to be that way. 1yellowknife had not been rude, he merely asked a question and you were being an a$$ in your response. Steeve, grow up, smarten up, or go away unless you can be more mature in your posts. Hugues, if all you are saying is true, then I wish you all the best and I hope it doesn’t take too long to clear your name, I truly mean this.
regardless of any argument of the merits: there was an alleged offence and charge(s) were laid, then stayed – which can be for any number of reasons, one of which because the Crown does not have sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction. So: so long as there is nothing within the year that the police lay further charges (for other alleged offence) the one that was stayed disappears.
Allegde offence means nothing in itself. You assume that someone is guilty just because of accusations. It was based ONLY on what a person said and a alledge witness who , by the way got manipulated by the other person to back her up. Now follow logic, ‘New evidence’ and ‘new information by one of the withness’. GET IT? There was NEVER any evidence, just a story made up. And what is a shame is that courts almost never reverse charges for perjury. But, I will lay civil law suit. But I have to hire a lawyer, travel to Inuvik, 3000$ It is prohebitive. We dont have real justice in Canada ant the RCMP (at least some up there) are as bad. I am suing them for another case. And there is a lot more background to this story that started in 2010.
I agree with PJ: Charges for perjury or public mischief are possible. In the NWT, it is not politically popular but there is a recent case where the false accuser (a female stalker) was found guilty. Are you aware of that?
“Hugues” I was quite cognizant with my use of the word “alleged”: Alleged means everything itself: it is an allegation or “alleged” that an offence(s) occurred until proven guilty (or obviously a plea of guilty).
New evidence for defence (or Crown) happens all the time and determines how a case will proceed:withdrawal [if it is a high profile/publicized case the Crown doesn’t appear to have big enough shoulders to bear the public outcry to withdraw]; a STAY [leaving the door open for the authorities/Crown for one year if further information comes forward]; and if it goes to trial either an acquittal or conviction. “GET IT?”
The current charges can be pursued if at some point the Crown feels there is sufficient evidence to proceed.
I think the only way to get a feel for what happened here is to get the transcripts from the 30 August court date. There should be an inkling there as to what happened and what was or was not said about video evidence. If Steeve or Hugues want to get those transcripts and send them to me I would be happy to read through and pass on word of what happened.
That said, I am surprised that if these videos do exist they will be destroyed. Perhaps they were seized without a warrant or something?
I dont owe to send you anything. I am asking that you remore this entry in your blog. I will start legal actions if you dont. Nothing was seized without warrant. It was ALL based on what the ‘witness’ said. All 15 charges. And the crown realised what really happened. A setup. As for trial for perjury, it would have to happen in court under oath. So that monster who made those false accusation dodge it. We were prepare to prove the lies; she had set herlsefl up for ultiple perjury. But just telling lies to the RCMP does not suffise for criminal accusation. I can only sue her in a civil law suit.
He doesn’t have to be charged with a new offence. If there is new evidence related to the charges which were stayed the Crown might decide to proceed. So, for example, IF the charges were stayed in whole or in part because a key witness is currently unable or unwilling to testify and thus the Crown feels unable to proceed, and IF that witness in the next few months is able to testify, then the Crown could decide to proceed.
However….
….to be fair in all cases you shouldn’t expect that everything that comes out of Court hasn’t been “planned” for some shady, subtle, awkward (?) reason: for example, a stayed charge can help to “save face” without ever having to admit you were wrong! Defense and Crown can be very good at “scratching” each others back….and all sides can walk away pretending to a “victory”….It’s a 50-50 compromise and everyone is…happy?…satisfied?…well paid?…
jg
I am not satisfied. I lost 2 years of my life for false accusations and my son did not see his father in 2 years. I had to spend 16 month in jail on remand because I had no more residence in the NWT. Is that justice? No one will get this back for me. I can’t sue the horrible monster who made the false accusations (and manipulated someone into her lies). She is a drunk drug addict with no jobs. So I cant sue her.
Hugues,
Easy! I was referring to the Courts and the players, lawyers, not about you, in my last post. Their game, their money, their “satisfaction”…you can include the RCMP, if you wish, in the list of “face savers”….
Did they ever offer you a lie detector and or your accuser if the evidence was sketchy or just plain lacking?
jg
A lie detector is not a legal tool in Canada. I asked for it. It is the RCMP who had a severe lack of judgement. I have toi alos poitn out that the mother of my child is involed in the backgorund of all this and her aunt is an RCMP officer. She started to try to get me in jail with false accusation of attempting to kidnap my own son. The RCMp had my 2 week itinerary, my cell number, the address where I was going, I showd my new yea rlease and they knew I left all my things in Inuvik (60 000$ worth) And, it was my right to travel with my son, I did not even need to tell them all this. And yet, I gor arrested. That was CRIMINAL from the RCMP. I a am preparing a law suit. However, all these 15 other charges involved the same accuser who is best friend with the mother of my child. Monsters with no bundary to ruin someone. And I am not the first victim like that. My friend who is a lawyer in Inuvik got same kind of false acusation a few years back. He got absolved after a year of hell. Welcome to Inuvik!
Hugues: Sylvia had a generous suggestion I hope you follow up on. Send Sylvia your transcripts. It probably can be done via email (maybe in sections). Sylvia is renowned for her keen analysis and sound advice. She commands global respect and her understanding of northern issues is better than most. And – for your own sake – do not make negative comments (especially in writing) regarding the lifestyle, addictions and moral character of your accuser. It can backlash. In other words, it can hurt you.
My accuser is a druck, drug addict, a monster, a thief and a liar. Those are facts and I wont restrain myself on saying it. And I owe Sylvia or anyne here nothing. I will start legal action if thse entry are not removed.
“Hugues”:
if you are not Hugues Latour I would strongly urge you to admit you are not him in this blog and then request Syliva to remove (all) your libelous comments for two-fold reason: 1. you have done your friend a grievous disservice purporting to be him and making libelous comments about the accuser (especially if the accuser and/or authorities are also reading this blog) and 2. you leave yourself vulnerable to a potential civil action by the accuser for the libelous comments made.
If you are Hugues Latour I would strongly urge you to request Sylvia remove (all) your libelous comments as you have done yourself a grievous disservice, especially if the accuser and/or authorities are also reading this blog.
I said all along that I am Hugues Latour. And it is not libel it it is true.
Mr Latour: In the NWT, you can obtain criminal charges (not civil) for what you claim. There is a recent well-publicized NWT case which did exactly that. And it was reported on by some of the journalists who covered your case. You may wish to check your information/facts regarding this.
September 1, 2013 NNSL (northern news services) the foremost NWT print news source;
All charges against former Inuvik school teacher Hugues Latour have either been stayed by the Crown, or are expected to be stayed in the near future.
On Aug.30, Crown p r o s e c u t o r Marc Lecorre requested the Supreme Court stay all charges related to sexual touching of a minor, invitation to sexual touching of a minor, possession and making of child pornography, and trafficking marijuana.
“In light of the public interest on these matters,” Lecorre offered the court an explanation as to why the Crown will no longer pursue these charges.
On the day of jury selection, Aug. 12, two new pieces of information were revealed to the Crown, said Lecorre. One was disclosed to him by defence lawyer Serge Petitpas that morning. The other was disclosed by one of the Crown witnesses during that day’s lunch break.
While he would not comment on the specific nature of the new i n format ion, Lecorre said the revelations were significant enough for him to conclude there was no reasonable hope for conviction.
The Crown has a duty to consider the credibility of witnesses and the strength of possible defences, which he said were both impacted. This new information caused the Crown to conclude there is “no reasonable prospect of conviction of any of Latour’s charges,” Lecorre told the court.
In May 2012, Latour was found guilty of assault, forcible entry and failing to keep the peace and be of good behaviour, a conviction that was later overturned on the grounds the trial was not conducted in French.
Although the court had ordered a new trial be held on these matters, Lecorre told News/North on Aug. 30 the Crown has no intention of pursuing these charges further, and will make an outof- court request to stay those charges.
“I don’t anticipate that the Crown will be proceeding with a new trial,” he said.
This isn’t the first time Latour has avoided conviction for criminal charges. On Dec. 9, 2010, he was charged with parental abduction – that charge was stayed on Dec. 18, 2012.
Latour was also charged with assault, forcible confinement and failure to comply with court orders on Aug. 1, 2011. Those charges were withdrawn on Jan. 31, 2012,
with the assault and forcible confinement charges being dismissed May 10, 2012.
Data to be destroyed
An order was also made to return items seized from Latour during the criminal investigation, including electronic items that contained sensitive pictures related to the case.
“The electronic items will be wiped of data,” said Lecorre. “Those pictures will certainly not be returned.”
Before granting the order, Supreme Court Justice Louise Charbonneau asked Lecorre for clarification on whether there was any intention to continue with pursuing any charges against Latour in the future, as normally a stay in proceedings does not conclude
a matter.
Lecorre answered no.
The issue of whether any exhibits presented to the court should be destroyed is outstanding, and is scheduled to be decided on Sept. 30.
Court considers matter closed
Also, all outstanding bail conditions against Latour were lifted.
“Any bail conditions that were enforced up until now are no longer enforced because this matter is now concluded as far as the court is concerned,” said Charbonneau.
The Crown is duty bound not to prosecute anyone unnecessarily, Lecorre told News/North.
“The Crown doesn’t want anybody to be found guilty when they reasonably shouldn’t be,” he said.
Latour was not present in court on Aug. 30, and in his absence proceedings were conducted in English.
Charbonneau also promised to file written reasons why, in the week before the jury selection, she denied the defence’s attempt to have the matter thrown out because of excessive delay.
Latour became a resident of Inuvik in 2007 and taught grades 5 and 6 at Sir Alexander Mackenzie School. He also worked as Samuel Hearne Secondary School’s French Immersion teacher. He has not worked at either school since the winter of 2010.
Good article, 1yellowknife! Explains many things I was questioning myself on. Won’t say anything else but I believe you and I are on the same wavelength here. Have a great day my friend!
Regardless of all of the court movement and charges layed, this person put himself in situations that have been questioned by many. I sure would not be pleased if he was teaching my children french. He may be innocent of all charges however I question his judgement and how he may have come to this end. He obviously knows how to defend himself however he sure gets himself into hot water in developing questionable relationships with his pupils. In lay terms this would be called “leading with the chin.”
Questionable relationship with my pupils? You knwo nothing and this si slauders. I will not accept that. Rectract and appologised. I will sue you. And it was the crown who stoped the procedure, not the how I defend myself in court.
What a demanding ar$ehole you are…go away!
I am the one who was falsely accused. So go to hell PJ, a coward who hides behind a computer. How about you provide your full name. Go get a life. This entry HAS to be removed. I will not tolerate to see my name in that blog.
Thanks for that article 1yellowknife.
The whole thing is one royal mess.
Perhaps there weren’t videos after all? Perhaps it was pictures? Read this excerpt
“Data to be destroyed
“An order was also made to return items seized from Latour during the criminal investigation, including electronic items that contained sensitive pictures related to the case.
“’The electronic items will be wiped of data,’ said Lecorre. ‘Those pictures will certainly not be returned.’”
Anyway, it’s a mess, and barring Steeve and/or Hugues providing the transcript we will never know what exactly transpired in the courtroom on 30 August.
As a point of interest, Steeve and Hugues either share a computer or are one and the same person.
re: “Steeve/Hugues” one and the same: I couldn’t help but notice that the typing/writing skill/form of each seemed quite similar.
And “they” share other qualities: A lot of time (to post online) and a lot of free-floating rage. Honestly, Sylvia, I think we have heard enough.
as I said. it was a setup, and no videos. In other words: nothig wrong was done by me. I wont go in more details to explain how to interpret what was in the news article about pictures because I will start civil law suit against the accuser.
I have found and will post several legal documents related to Hugues Latour. Once I have them posted I will link to them here.
What really got me is that the “language ” issue may have been used to get out of legal situation! I have worked with people who used the “i dun understand” escape hatch and it always p’d me right off! Obviously “Hugues” was quite happy to have a second language to get a job up North and when push came to shove he took an “ace” from his sleeve!….(pronounced “àss” in French…)
Secondly, why would there be disturbing video that needed to be destroyed???…..
Hugues, Steeve, Mona Lisa, Cheech and Chong….whoever. I and many have difficulty in “identifying” the source of the fire but….the smoke is suffocating! You started this, Hugues! Finish it!…
What disturbing photos/films are we talking about??…
What don’t you understand of the English language that made you sneak out the back door??…
jg
You understand nothing of how it happened for the language issue. And that was NOT the element I brought up to court for an appeal. Evidence of lies, something th judge completely misuderstood, new evidence that came up after, one withness admiting she was asked to go by the accuser and was told what to say etc… So screw you with the language issue. I was falsely accused and dealth with this for years and spent 16 month in jail for no reason. So I wont let poeple like you make comment like this. You know nothing, dont speculate.
Hugues,
My comments on language were posted at 12:12 and Sylvia provided the Court transcript(below) at 12:56. I quickly read all of them and I can see where you were “ill served” by the system and where you even tried to accommodate the Court! Quite unusual and in all fairness to you, regardless of the other issues, to be commended.
Like others I have pushed your buttons and you are fighting back fiercely, like a man defending his property, not like an intruder… My “sneaking out the back door” comment was out of place once I consider the Court transcripts posted by Sylvia.
A lot of your explanations make a lot of sense or at least are within the realm of possibilities as you have outlined them. You are fighting back like a caged animal and I agree it is not fair for you to feel attacked from all directions. Take a deep breath and don’t get in a fist fight with everyone. You might be surprised that in all the questions and the “inquisition” you could initially find some “benefit of the doubt” and eventually some support.
I, for one, right now, am giving you that “benefit”! …There is “nothing” that you have explained in your own defense , in your dealings with family, RCMP, friends that I have not personally witnessed in my life…
I will not speculate on your guilt or innocence. I have just expressed my opinion on the comments you made and on the articles, documents presented here.
I certainly have no interest in putting down an innocent man.
It is your battle to find support: pay close attention so you don’t turn off or turn away that support!
Je comprends ce qui est arrivé avec la question de “language” mais je devais poser la question. Je suis satisfait que ce n’étais pas un “échappatoire”.
Bonne chance.
jg
ditto
Another news article from January 2013 of interest to help put the legal documents I am about to post into some perspective:
Hugues Latour out on bail
Former Inuvik teacher’s abduction charge stayed
Katherine Hudson
Northern News Services
Published Monday, January 28, 2013
SOMBA K’E/YELLOWKNIFE
A former teacher in Inuvik charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and encouraging sexual touching with a person under the age of 16 was granted bail in Supreme Court on Jan. 24.
Hughes Latour had been in jail since he was arrested in September 2011. He was denied bail when he applied last August. News/North cannot reveal the judge’s reasons for granting Latour’s release last week due to a publication ban.
Latour is to be tried by judge and jury in Yellowknife on Aug. 12. The trial, expected to last up to five days, will be in French, according to Crown prosecutor Marc Lecorre.
Latour is also awaiting a trial date on four child pornography charges.
Latour is appealing a guilty sentence on charges of forcible entry, assault, and failing to follow court conditions. He was convicted in May 2012 and sentenced to 60 days in jail.
Lecorre said he argued the appeal in French in Supreme Court on Jan. 24 and expects a decision in writing from Justice Louise Charbonneau at a later date.
Regarding an unrelated charge, Justice Karen Shaner ruled on Jan. 23 that Latour’s application for a judicial stay of proceedings pertaining to the alleged abduction of his son in 2010 would be granted. Latour applied for the stay on Dec. 17, 2012, the date that was finally set for his trial on the charge – more than two years after the initial charge.
Latour claimed his right to be tried within a reasonable time was violated. He was arrested and charged with one count of parental abduction on Dec. 15, 2010.
“Ultimately, his trial, which was scheduled initially for Feb. 27, 2012, would not proceed until two years and two days from the charge, on Dec. 17, 2012. This was over a year from the time that the Crown first discovered its scheduling mistake,” Shaner wrote in her decision.
The scheduling error took place on Dec. 3, 2011, when the Crown discovered that the assigned prosecutor would be away on vacation when the trial was then scheduled to proceed in February 2012 in Inuvik.
Shaner said although the charge serious, the case seemed to be uncomplicated for the lawyers: it was one charge set to take place before a judge alone with no expert witnesses or reporters. She also stated that Latour did not contribute to the delays of the case in a significant way.
“Society has an interest in ensuring that those accused of crimes are brought to trial;. However, society also has an interest in ensuring criminal proceedings are conducted in a manner that complies with each individual’s charter rights,” Shaner stated. “In this case, the delay was unexplained, unreasonable and Mr. Latour suffered prejudice.”
Latour became a resident of Inuvik in 2007 and taught grades 5 and 6 at Sir Alexander Mackenzie School. He also worked as Samuel Hearne Secondary School’s French immersion teacher. He has not worked at either school since winter 2010.
Here are the documents. Two, as you will see, are in French. You can copy and paste the text into google translate (http://translate.google.com/) to get a general idea of the gist if the rulings. Here are the documents:
13 August 2013: FRENCH text R v Latour, 2013 CSTN-0 67 (Judge Charbonneau re Hugues Latour request first for a French trial, and then for a bilingual trial)
24 April 2013: FRENCH text Latour v SMLR 2013 CSTNO 22 (Judge Charbonneau denies Latour request for stay of proceedings because Latour was not initially informed of his right to trial in French, and orders a new trial to be conducted in French)
23 January 2013: R v Latour 2013 NWTSC 04 Memorandum of Judgment (Judge K. Shaner grants Hugues Latour a stay based on violation of his Carter right to a speedy trial. Latour had been charged with one count of parental abduction)
04 June 2011: R v Hugues Latour NWTTC 2012 08 Reasons for Judgment (Judge Robert Gorin finds Hugues Latour guilty of forcible confinement, assault, and breach of recognizance)
Mr innocent isn’t quite so squeaky clean after all. And pulling the language card out when he can clearly understand and work in English is a bit of a pissoff as week. I agree that if he wanted to be tried in french, to allow it but I’ll be willing to bet he and his attorney let the system trundle along until D-Day and then played it…to cause more delays. I too believe Steeve was Hugues all along. He knows how to play the system and since past performance usually predicts future performance, I think he’ll be going through other legal proceedings in the future. When you lie with dogs, you’re gonna get fleas!
He’s been awful quite lately…likely lurking now.
PJ, I suspected “Steeve” and “Hugues” were one and the same as soon as I saw the tremendous praise and the incredible insight “Steeve” had in this case… not to mention the similar grammatical errors! After his performance on this blog, I would find anything he says rather doubtful… like he’s been playing with us too – “using” Sylvia’s Site to plead his case, to threaten, to allege future lawsuits, etc.
As far as I’m concerned, I’m done “following” his story here – or anywhere else. Don’t want to bet getting any “fleas” 🙂
jj
Yes I am innocent and clean. And carefull what you say I will sue you. I wont tolerate poeple like you making idiotic comment like this. How about you tell me your full real name?
You are so pathetic with your loud barking…laughable!!
And you an imbecile who think he knows something. Freedom of speech is also reposibility to shut up when you know nothing. You are witness of nothing. Now get a life and stop posting
No, YOU get a life and stop posting. You are a pathetic excuse of a man…responding to everybody’s posts like the bully you obviously are, with your insults and empty threats. You blame the whole world for your troubles but it’s obvious you are the author of your own misfortunes. If you would have taken the high road and tried to carry on a mature dialogue instead of the childish way you did, we wouldn’t be responding the way we are.
For those outside the NWT who are reading this saga: I have no insight if errors were made/not made. However, the reporters and the judges named in above documents have solid, credible reputations. They are viewed as the best in their field. Bear that in mind.
There are court documents posted. There are several articles posted. Those who are interested can read the rulings and can also google for other media coverage.
Hugues, you have had ample opportunity to have your say. I responded to your private email – as I said to you and I said here, I do believe that the text of the recent decision might enlighten all. It may eventually be available online, but I did suggest you get a copy and send it along. I think now however there has been enough. IF indeed you were wrongly convicted and charged Hugues, I wish you well. I am all too aware that errors have been made by the courts in the past. I am also aware from court documents that the abduction charges were stayed because the judge agreed with you and/or your lawyer that your Charter right to a speedy trial had been violated. There is nothing there to tell us whether you did or did not abduct a child, only that the case took too long to go to trial, and that that was argued and accepted by the judge as cause to grant a stay.
I see no reports of videos in the transcripts, but I do see reference to pictures, and that a decision will be made as to what will be done with those pictures.
As for everything else, much that is on record and not under publication ban in the legal documents which I posted seems to revolve around arguments to have the charges dismissed, or stayed or to have a mistrial declared. Whatever the grounds were for the recent stay are unknown. I don’t believe I will be getting copies of the transcript from you Hughue, and, I truly can not afford to order every transcript which might clarity to situations such as this.
There really is no more to be said. I will not be deleting the articles. If someone is charged for wrongly accusing you of things which led to all of these charges please let me know and I will be happy to post whatever media coverage accompanies the charges.
I see northern fancy makes reference to a case in the NWT similar to yours in which charges were laid. I think I know the case but must check. I will see what I can find.
I am closing this thread. I will open it only to add information related to having charges laid in cases such as this.
I received an email from Hugues Latiour advising that CBC has corrected it’s error regarding the destruction of videos. Hugues copied the following email which he received from CBC North:
I have made note of the correction in the article which I posted as a comment above on 01 September 2013.
I’m glad you got that straightened out Hugues and am more than happy to publicly note the correction.
This is a reminder to us all that reporters can and sometimes do err.
I will leave the thread open for today to allow anyone who wishes to do so to comment.
Hugue,
I don’t know if you are still there but if so, I am curious about something else, if you care to clarify. This is not an attack or a judgement from my high horse…
Now that we know the video mention was, as you said, “incorrect”…can you clarify why under one of the articles cited here there is mention of “having and making” child pornography, charges being withdrawn, and under a previous or other document I read of the charges against you being withdrawn with no mention of this “having and making” child pornography. Would this all have been related to the non-existent videos or from still photos taken from your computer?…
I remember a news story last winter I believe where a lady had some films developed at a Wal-Mart…An employee there ended-up calling the Police to report “child pornography”…To make a long story short, I remember there were apologies because in this case it was made clear that some family pictures were judged inappropriate by this employee…incorrectly it seemed, proving that “ugly” can be in the eye of the beholder, right next to beauty…
I also read that you were into film making??…Is that the connection?
You seem to address the videos, the false accusations, the Court difficulties, etc. but these charges you did not comment on. Is there an explanation you care to share ?
Let me reiterate that I and probably many others can understand your anger, your rage and whatever shape your fight takes if you have been falsely accused. If that proves to be the case, I don’t think anyone has a right to put you down for being a fighter. Maybe not as calm, collected and cool as some would like but in my experience I have met seemingly inappropriate and rude persons who were not guilty as charged: just terribly hurt, frustrated and at wits end…
If my memory is correct, for as long as I have been on this site(almost 4 years),you are the first to identify yourself as an accused and daring to face the gauntlet!…and I easily forgive you your initial entries under the “Steeve” pseudo! There are some who never leave that safe anonymity….
Your case is certainly intriguing for an inquisitive person!
I hope you turn out as a good guy. We have had enough perverts.
jg
Hi JG,
All the accusations came fromthe same person and was based only on what she said. She also brought along another person to help her. All based on verbal testimonies. Some media even said, before they seized my electronic equipement, that some ‘disturbing’ elements were found. It took ctualy more than 9 months for them to check my hard drives etc. I despise media like that who are there to color stories their own way. And I had other false accusation before this in 2010. Alleged kidnaping of my own child. It’s all from the same poeple. There is custody issues here and this is how a certain person decided to deal with it. Horrible. And I am not the first person who had false accusations like that. A friend laywer in Inuvik was falsely accusd by the mother of his child in 2009. He also was cleared of all charges but lived a year of hell. Fortunately for him he was not kept in jail on remand. The RCMp in Inuvik dont properly investigate before laying charges (perhaps not all of them but many). Another example of how they deal with situations: I was victim of domestic violence and had to spend 2 days in the hospital with a cuncussion (he mother of my child jumped on my head!). I also had pictures of huge scars. I asked the RCMP to arrest her. They did not press charge. Right now I will not enter in many details btu there is a LOT more to all this. I am preparing to sue the RCMP. And I have to fight to have my son back; her mother hides him from me in Tuktoyaktuk despite a court order. However to get custody, I have to start another battle in court. And the accuser can’t be charged by the crown for perjury since she did not say anything under oath. I was looking forward to court. Believe me I wanted court to happen when they dismised it for lack of jury. And for the language issue that resulted in an order of new trial, there was many more elements for an appeal and the judge said she did not need to look at them since the language was enough to ask for another trial. And the lawyer I had at the time asked me if I wanted a French lawyer and not a trial in French. He even thaught I did not have that right (a laywer with 35+ years of experience!). When I said I was ok with english, I meant what was going on at the moment. Not a full trial. Note that all other trials were all made in French. That was because I wanted them all in french From the start (or bilingual).
Hugues,
“He also faces charges of possessing child pornography and of making child pornography.”
That above line copied from the original post by Sylvia(second paragraph) and in line with another supposed statement by the Police: “After getting a search warrant, police say they found disturbing pictures and videos”….in the same CBC script.
Are you saying this is all fabrication and without any merit?
When I reflect on circumstances, the return of your internet privileges and an apparent scramble to “clear” the courtroom, I find there is plenty of questions to be answered….not just by you.
If your conscience is clear you may want to limit your comments in this media and seek good advice.
You are not expected to burn yourself at the stake here(my view, anyway) but if you can be “truthful” without digging a deeper hole for yourself, think twice and write once!
Remember, you don’t owe anyone here anything and you won’t get any sympathy if you have hurt a child in any way.
As a footnote, your last response doesn’t address my question about the pornography.
Think twice, honestly!
Otherwise, my interest meter will no longer register any response!
jg
What questions? I answered. It was ALL false accusations based on verbal testimonies by a horrible person with no morals. And yes the CBC (again) published wrong informations. I was clear on that. The crown would not remove charges! Sylvia needs to remove this entry. 15 charges, not found guilty on any or removed. 15 on 15. I was a victim, and so was my son be not having his father for 2 years. I will not tolerate furthur damaging elements from web site, media or blog. And yes CBC will have to remove their error, for a 2nd time.