Jury to hear evidence in incest trial next year
Saint John man is accused historical sex crimes, including having intercourse with his daughter in 2008-09
A Saint John man who opted to have a jury decide his fate on historical sex crimes - including incest - will stand trial early next year.
The 53-year-old man - whom the Fredericton Independent isn’t naming so as to protect the identity of the complainant - previously elected to be tried before a Court of King’s Bench judge and jury on three sex-related charges, and the case was before Justice Thomas Christie on Monday at motions day to confirm trial dates.
The defendant is accused of sexually assaulting his underage daughter, touching her for a sexual purpose and having sexual intercourse with her knowing they had a “blood relationship.”
The first two counts allege events in Fredericton and elsewhere in New Brunswick between Dec. 1, 2002, and March 31, 2011, while the incest charge alleges the events occurred in Fredericton between Jan. 1, 2008, and Dec. 21, 2009.
The defendant wasn’t present in at the Burton Courthouse on Monday for motions day, but defence lawyer Edward Derrah filed a designation of counsel, allowing him to appear on his client’s behalf on the indictable charges.
Christie noted the five-day jury trial is scheduled to begin Feb. 7, 2024, with a pre-trial conference set for Oct. 17.
Derrah and prosecutor Nina Johnsen confirmed those dates were acceptable.
The defence said there will be some preliminary issues on which it will ask the court to rule.
“I anticipate some pre-trial motions,” Derrah said, though he didn’t indicate what the nature of those motions might be.
There’s been no preliminary inquiry in the case, which is a proceeding held in provincial court to determine if there’s sufficient evidence to set more serious charges over for trial at the higher level of court.
The reason this case skipped the preliminary inquiry stage is because the Crown employed a rarely used section of the Criminal Code of Canada allowing for what’s called a “direct indictment.”
Section 577 of the Criminal Code notes that “an indictment may be preferred even if the accused has not been given the opportunity to request a preliminary inquiry… in the case of a prosecution conducted by the Attorney General or one in which the Attorney General intervenes, the personal consent in writing of the Attorney General or Deputy Attorney General is filed in court; or in any other case, a judge of the court so orders.”
It’s not clear why the Crown exercised that option in this case.
Don MacPherson can be contacted at ftonindependent@gmail.com.
Hard to believe. However it’s the world we live in. Keep the stories coming.