What does kgb statement stand for

The judge initially requested a legal aid staff lawyer to attend, but that counsel declined to act as the accused was financially ineligible for legal aid. The judge was of the view that two options were available: to grant a stay until the state provided funded counsel to cross-examine, or to immediately appoint a lawyer who was present, sent by the Barreau du Quebec the equivalent of the Law Society and ready to cross-examine.

The Court noted that it was of prime importance to have counsel undertake the cross-examination in a timely manner, which required an order that the Attorney General of Quebec would pay the fees and expenses of counsel [84].

The Appeal Court held that while it is within the power of the court under this provision to select a lawyer to represent the accused for the purposes of cross-examination, it is not within its power to determine the fees to be paid by the Ministry of the Attorney General, as this would be an infringement on the executive and legislative power of the Ministry.

The Court of Appeal stated that an order selecting legal counsel for a self-represented accused should be accompanied by a stay in proceedings in order for the Ministry to make payment arrangements. Papequash , [86] an order had been made for legal representation for the purpose of cross-examination of a child, and the accused had not contacted any lawyers.

Gower J. Peetooloot , [87] Gorin Terr. The judge directed the clerk of the court to make the necessary arrangements to retain counsel, and suggested that the fees would be paid at counsel's "full private rate. The judge continued: "However, I will point out the obvious, and that is that ultimately it will be the taxpayer who will be picking up the tab regardless of which department or board pays.

Jula Hughes characterized this remedy as "both creative and eloquent on the absurdity caused by the legislative lacuna. Civello , [89] per Jennis J made an order under s. The court requested that the local Criminal Lawyers Association provide a list of senior counsel willing and able to do this work to the accused. The accused was offered a choice from this list, and if he was unwilling to do so, the judges would make the selection for him. While it is preferable for the accused to have a role in the selection of counsel, his failure to do so should not result in a delay of the proceedings.

A theme that runs through these cases is that, since the legislation is silent about the method of appointment and payment of counsel in s.

Understandably, judges are reluctant to be involved in the relationship between the accused and counsel, and there are no reported cases in which the judge has directly selected counsel for an accused. The limited representation of an accused solely for the purpose of cross-examination of a child witness is a challenging role for counsel.

Qamaniq , [90] Johnson J. Subsection The application should be on notice to the accused. If the application is only made at the time of trial, it may be necessary for there to be an adjournment to allow counsel to be retained and to have time to prepare. Section Varcoe , [91] the Ontario Court of Appeal held that no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice had occurred due to the trial judge's decision to not appoint counsel and to allow the accused to cross-examine the year-old complainant.

The court seemed to place significant weight on the complainant's age as well as the fact that she had consented to the cross-examination, though also noting that the way in which the trial judge had dealt with s.

A new trial was ordered on other grounds. The current s. The present provision applies to any offence, not just a sexual offence, and creates a presumption that a recording of an interview with any child witness will be admitted, provided that it was made "within a reasonable time" of the incident. Under the present ss. Ortiz , [92] Pugsley J. Significantly, Parliament imported such pre-requisite into the wording of the newly amended companion section s.

Clearly s. The Crown need not establish these as pre-requisites to admission under the section. In the recent case of R. Vanderwerff , [96] Read J. On the other hand, such determination must also take into account social science data which makes clear that recollection decreases in accuracy with time. Factors in assessing whether the tape was made within a "reasonable time" may include:.

Mulder [] statements from 3 complainants age 10 to 12 recorded approximately 11 months after the alleged incidents were held admissible. The boys did not disclose their alleged abuse until a few days before the interview. Miller J. The recorded statements are likely to be more accurate recollections of the events. The court held that none of the complainants were so young that the delay raised obvious concerns about their ability to accurately recall the incidents with the accused.

Further, there was ample evidence from which reasons for a delay in disclosure could be inferred, relating to the fact that the accused was in a position of authority over the complainants.

Bortei , [] the accused argued that since the alleged assaults went on for eight years, the videotaped statements made by the complainants should not be admissible, as there was no way to determine whether they had been made within a "reasonable time" after the alleged events occurred.

Justice R. Smith admitted the videotapes, ruling that they were made within a reasonable time of the last alleged acts within 2 months , and stating that the probative value of the evidence outweighed any possible prejudice towards the accused. Further this case provides an example of videotaped statements which were admitted into evidence despite the fact the complainants were 16 and 20 years of age respectively at the time of trial.

The complainants were minors when most of the alleged acts occurred. The phrase "the acts complained of" was already interpreted before to include a description given by the complainant of her alleged assailant and statements made by the attacker during the offence.

Ramasaroop , [] it was also held to be broad enough to be used to admit a video-recording of a statement from a youth who had not directly observed the alleged assault, but who described the actions of the accused shortly after the alleged assault and helped to place the accused at the scene of the alleged assault. They include: a the requirement that the statement be made within a reasonable time; b the trier of fact can watch the entire interview, which provides an opportunity to observe the demeanor, and assess the personality and intelligence of the child; c the requirement that the child attest that she was attempting to be truthful at the time that the statement was made.

As well, the child can be cross-examined at trial as to whether he or she was actually being truthful when the statement was made. These indicia provide enough guarantees of reliability to compensate for the inability to cross-examine as to the forgotten events. Moreover, where the complainant has no independent memory of the events there is an obvious necessity for the videotaped evidence. In Meddoui , it was recommended that in such circumstances, the trier of fact should be given a special warning […] of the dangers of convicting based on the videotape alone.

In my view, this was sage advice that should be followed. If, in the course of cross-examination, defence counsel elicits evidence which contradicts any part of the video, this does not render those parts inadmissible. Obviously a contradicted videotape may well be given less weight in the final determination of the issues. However, the fact that the video is contradicted in cross-examination does not necessarily mean that the video is wrong or unreliable.

The trial judge may still conclude, as in this case, that the inconsistencies are insignificant and find the video more reliable than the evidence elicited at trial. The trial judge accepted that the video-recording of a year-old complainant's statement to the police two days after the alleged assault was more "reliable and accurate" than her testimony at trial, which was considered to be "embellished somewhat," as her memory had been "effectively tainted" by conversations with her mother, who was "strongly hostile" to the accused, her former boyfriend.

Vanderwerff , [] the two complainants were 7 and 8 years of age at the time of the alleged incidents of sexual abuse, and videotaped interviews were conducted by the police within a week of the last incident. The trial occurred more than two years later and there were some inconsistencies between their testimony and the recorded statements. Start free consultation. What Is Considered Sexual Assault?

Admissibility At The U. Catharines St. Play Video. Video Transcript:. Have you been charged with an impaired driving or criminal offence? Tell us your side Contact us now to start your free consultation.

Toll Free: Email defence kruselaw. Related Videos. See more related videos. We could talk until we're blue in the face about this quiz on words for the color "blue," but we think you should take the quiz and find out if you're a whiz at these colorful terms. Compare Cheka. Revolution Dallas McCord Reynolds. Combat Dallas McCord Reynolds.

All rights reserved.