A case of malicious prosecution?
Ms Paula Todd
Host
The Verdict with Paula Todd
www.theverdict/ctv.ca
theverdict@ctv.ca
Hi Paula,
The following article appears in the current issue of Thundervoice News (publisher@thundervoice.ca) a Winnipeg based monthly newsletter (35,000 circulation) distributed throughout First Nation and Metis communities in Manitoba/Northern Ontario. It has also been reproduced on the internet (www.derrylsanderson.blogspot.com). TN is owned and published by Dennis Spence.
It raises several issues your show's Producers might wish to consider for a future segment of The Verdict:
(1) What does Canadian law say about malicious prosecution? Is it true they're long, costly and hard to prove cases? Should the Crown push forward to trial especially after initiating plea bargain negotiations on the eve of opening arguments?
(2) Do the acquitted have any legal recourse such as wrongful dismissal, defamation, slander or libel litigation?
Best Wishes,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACQUITTED
Former IMFC Executive Director Cleared Of All Charges
By Mark Watson
News Editor
Thundervoice News
May 2007 Issue
High profile Aboriginal leader Jeff Richard, the former Executive Director of the Indian & Metis Friendship Centre of Winnipeg, was completely cleared of a sexual assault charge when the Honourable Judge Howard Collerman cast a verdict of Not Guilty at the outcome of a provincial court trial on May 9, 2007.
The sexual assault charge stemmed from an allegation of an incident that had occurred on September 9, 2005, when Jeff Richard and Gwen Pylatuik were sharing a hotel room in Brandon as they attended the Annual General Meeting of Manitoba Friendship Centres.
The initial complaint was made on September 23, 2005 via a written statement to the Winnipeg Police by Gwen Pylatiuk under the direction of Ella Mayer, the Executive Director of the Manitoba Association of Friendship Centres who was also in attendance on one of the afternoons of the three day trial which began on May 7, 2007. Mr. Richard was contacted by the Winnipeg Police and asked to make a video statement which he did with full cooperation and without the benefit, at that time, of an attorney. Having considered himself completely innocent of the allegation, Mr. Richard hadn't felt that legal representation was required.
"I was completely flabbergasted," says Richard, speaking of his response to being informed of the charge by Constable Pennell of the Winnipeg Police Services. "I was in a state of shock throughout the entire video statement and didn't represent myself as well as I would have liked during the bombardment of questions.
"This nearly became Richard's undoing as his video statement, made impromptu and under considerable duress, lacked certain specific details which were essential to proving his innocence. In an endeavor to amend this fundamental flaw in his defense case, Jeff Richard took the stand on the second day of his trial to flesh out the particulars of the incident which would consequently reinforce his position of innocence. The prosecuting attorney, during the cross examination of Richard's testimony, adamantly pointed out that the additional information provided in the testimony was incongruent with the initial video statement that Richard had given in September of 2005.
The cross examination amounted to little more than an exercise in spurious semantics, however, as none of the new information was in discordance with Richard's video statement, although some of it refuted both the testimony and prepared written statements of the complainant, Pylatiuk, who also had some glaring discrepancies between her initial statement to the police and her testimony on the stand. The defense attorney reminded the court that Richard's video statement had been made on the spur of the moment, without his client having a clear picture of which details would be significant to his case.
It should be noted that, in the key points where the testimonies of Pylatiuk and Richard merged in reluctant harmony, they appeared to support Richard's steadfast claim of innocence which he'd held firm to from the very onset. In fact, when the crown offered a deal just prior to the trial which would have essentially amounted to a slap on the wrist if Jeff Richard would agree to plead guilty, Richard vehemently refused."I'm not going to plead guilty to something I didn't do," he declared emphatically to his attorney when told of the deal.
Throughout the trial it became increasingly clear that the Crown had a tissue thin case built upon the crumbling foundation of a testimony from a complainant who admitted to a flawed recollection of the events and, in fact, stated on the stand that she had been trying to forget about it. Additionally, the testimony of Constable Pennell actually supported a portion of the defense's case by affirming that Richard appeared "genuinely stunned" by the allegation and by admitting, under cross examination, that the video interview wasn't all that it could have been due to the premise that there simply wasn't enough evidence for the police to lay charges and that the case would be sent, as a matter of protocol, to the crown for review.
In the end, The Honourable Judge Howard Collerman, following procedure in such cases where the onus of proof is placed upon the complainant and the benefit of doubt is granted to the accused, ultimately acquitted Mr. Richard who was supported throughout the proceedings by friends and family, including his mother Ursula, his sister Simone, his brother Rick, his wife Magda, his good and loyal friend Victor Colonval, Thundervoice News Editor Mark Watson and Thundervoice News Publisher Dennis Spence.
There are many who believe that these sexual assault allegations were orchestrated by Ella Mayer of MAFC in an attempt to discredit Jeff Richard's name and have him removed as Executive Director from the IMFC of Winnipeg. "It's all part of an insidious plot," says Victor Colonval.
"Ella knew that implicating Jeff in a sex scandal would pave her way into getting the Friendship Centre. It's what she's been wanting to do for years and she jumped on this opportunity right off the bat."It does seem very compelling, to say the least, that Ella Mayer attached herself with such eagerness to this case. Before these allegations had arisen, Mayer did not know the complainant.
Pylatiuk stated under oath that she had approached the Director of her school following the Brandon incident due to her own personal (and unfounded) concerns that Jeff Richard might interfere with her education funding. The Director (who was not named) of the complainant's school forwarded the information to Michelle Boivin who, in turn, passed the grievance on to Ella Mayer. Ella Mayer, according to court records (which I have in my possession), then told Pylatiuk that she would "take care of everything."
After a brief examination of certain aspects to the chronology of events leading up to the MAFC take-over of the IMFC of Winnipeg, it is difficult to dismiss Mayer's interest in this case as being merely supportive of a 'maiden in distress' so to speak. That Mayer had a keenly vested interest in charges of a sexual nature being posed against Jeff Richard is clearly evident and reasonably follows, considering that allegations of sexual misconduct played a significant role in the removal of Jeff Richard as Executive Director of the IMFC of Winnipeg and the ultimate take over of the Centre by an Interim Governance Committee appointed by the Manitoba Association of Friendship Centres.
The entire episode smacks of 'dirty politics', however, as this reporter was unable to reach Ella Mayer for comment by press time, this is a matter of conjecture. In light of the complete acquittal of the sexual assault charge, the rumor mill which has been working over-time in regards to Mr. Richard's conduct can now, hopefully, be put to rest. Two such rumors were that Richard had used his position of authority in an attempt to seduce Pylatiuk and that he had openly groped her at the annual meeting in Brandon. Jeff Richard clearly did not abuse his authority in an endeavor to seduce a subordinate, nor did he openly grope Pylatiuk in a public arena. Neither of these presumptions were addressed in any way by either side during the trial.
Jeff Richard is extremely pleased to put this sordid affair behind him and focus on repairing his relationship with his wife, Magda which has understandably endured much strain as a result of the fiasco. Immediately following the acquittal, he expressed deep gratitude to all those who stood by him in his darkest hour. We at Thundervoice News wish him and his family all the best with the sincerest hope that there are nothing but brighter days ahead.
Jeff Richard
Distribution List:
theverdict@ctv.ca
publisher@thundervoice.ca
Host
The Verdict with Paula Todd
www.theverdict/ctv.ca
theverdict@ctv.ca
Hi Paula,
The following article appears in the current issue of Thundervoice News (publisher@thundervoice.ca) a Winnipeg based monthly newsletter (35,000 circulation) distributed throughout First Nation and Metis communities in Manitoba/Northern Ontario. It has also been reproduced on the internet (www.derrylsanderson.blogspot.com). TN is owned and published by Dennis Spence.
It raises several issues your show's Producers might wish to consider for a future segment of The Verdict:
(1) What does Canadian law say about malicious prosecution? Is it true they're long, costly and hard to prove cases? Should the Crown push forward to trial especially after initiating plea bargain negotiations on the eve of opening arguments?
(2) Do the acquitted have any legal recourse such as wrongful dismissal, defamation, slander or libel litigation?
Best Wishes,
Clare L. Pieuk
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ACQUITTED
Former IMFC Executive Director Cleared Of All Charges
By Mark Watson
News Editor
Thundervoice News
May 2007 Issue
High profile Aboriginal leader Jeff Richard, the former Executive Director of the Indian & Metis Friendship Centre of Winnipeg, was completely cleared of a sexual assault charge when the Honourable Judge Howard Collerman cast a verdict of Not Guilty at the outcome of a provincial court trial on May 9, 2007.
The sexual assault charge stemmed from an allegation of an incident that had occurred on September 9, 2005, when Jeff Richard and Gwen Pylatuik were sharing a hotel room in Brandon as they attended the Annual General Meeting of Manitoba Friendship Centres.
The initial complaint was made on September 23, 2005 via a written statement to the Winnipeg Police by Gwen Pylatiuk under the direction of Ella Mayer, the Executive Director of the Manitoba Association of Friendship Centres who was also in attendance on one of the afternoons of the three day trial which began on May 7, 2007. Mr. Richard was contacted by the Winnipeg Police and asked to make a video statement which he did with full cooperation and without the benefit, at that time, of an attorney. Having considered himself completely innocent of the allegation, Mr. Richard hadn't felt that legal representation was required.
"I was completely flabbergasted," says Richard, speaking of his response to being informed of the charge by Constable Pennell of the Winnipeg Police Services. "I was in a state of shock throughout the entire video statement and didn't represent myself as well as I would have liked during the bombardment of questions.
"This nearly became Richard's undoing as his video statement, made impromptu and under considerable duress, lacked certain specific details which were essential to proving his innocence. In an endeavor to amend this fundamental flaw in his defense case, Jeff Richard took the stand on the second day of his trial to flesh out the particulars of the incident which would consequently reinforce his position of innocence. The prosecuting attorney, during the cross examination of Richard's testimony, adamantly pointed out that the additional information provided in the testimony was incongruent with the initial video statement that Richard had given in September of 2005.
The cross examination amounted to little more than an exercise in spurious semantics, however, as none of the new information was in discordance with Richard's video statement, although some of it refuted both the testimony and prepared written statements of the complainant, Pylatiuk, who also had some glaring discrepancies between her initial statement to the police and her testimony on the stand. The defense attorney reminded the court that Richard's video statement had been made on the spur of the moment, without his client having a clear picture of which details would be significant to his case.
It should be noted that, in the key points where the testimonies of Pylatiuk and Richard merged in reluctant harmony, they appeared to support Richard's steadfast claim of innocence which he'd held firm to from the very onset. In fact, when the crown offered a deal just prior to the trial which would have essentially amounted to a slap on the wrist if Jeff Richard would agree to plead guilty, Richard vehemently refused."I'm not going to plead guilty to something I didn't do," he declared emphatically to his attorney when told of the deal.
Throughout the trial it became increasingly clear that the Crown had a tissue thin case built upon the crumbling foundation of a testimony from a complainant who admitted to a flawed recollection of the events and, in fact, stated on the stand that she had been trying to forget about it. Additionally, the testimony of Constable Pennell actually supported a portion of the defense's case by affirming that Richard appeared "genuinely stunned" by the allegation and by admitting, under cross examination, that the video interview wasn't all that it could have been due to the premise that there simply wasn't enough evidence for the police to lay charges and that the case would be sent, as a matter of protocol, to the crown for review.
In the end, The Honourable Judge Howard Collerman, following procedure in such cases where the onus of proof is placed upon the complainant and the benefit of doubt is granted to the accused, ultimately acquitted Mr. Richard who was supported throughout the proceedings by friends and family, including his mother Ursula, his sister Simone, his brother Rick, his wife Magda, his good and loyal friend Victor Colonval, Thundervoice News Editor Mark Watson and Thundervoice News Publisher Dennis Spence.
There are many who believe that these sexual assault allegations were orchestrated by Ella Mayer of MAFC in an attempt to discredit Jeff Richard's name and have him removed as Executive Director from the IMFC of Winnipeg. "It's all part of an insidious plot," says Victor Colonval.
"Ella knew that implicating Jeff in a sex scandal would pave her way into getting the Friendship Centre. It's what she's been wanting to do for years and she jumped on this opportunity right off the bat."It does seem very compelling, to say the least, that Ella Mayer attached herself with such eagerness to this case. Before these allegations had arisen, Mayer did not know the complainant.
Pylatiuk stated under oath that she had approached the Director of her school following the Brandon incident due to her own personal (and unfounded) concerns that Jeff Richard might interfere with her education funding. The Director (who was not named) of the complainant's school forwarded the information to Michelle Boivin who, in turn, passed the grievance on to Ella Mayer. Ella Mayer, according to court records (which I have in my possession), then told Pylatiuk that she would "take care of everything."
After a brief examination of certain aspects to the chronology of events leading up to the MAFC take-over of the IMFC of Winnipeg, it is difficult to dismiss Mayer's interest in this case as being merely supportive of a 'maiden in distress' so to speak. That Mayer had a keenly vested interest in charges of a sexual nature being posed against Jeff Richard is clearly evident and reasonably follows, considering that allegations of sexual misconduct played a significant role in the removal of Jeff Richard as Executive Director of the IMFC of Winnipeg and the ultimate take over of the Centre by an Interim Governance Committee appointed by the Manitoba Association of Friendship Centres.
The entire episode smacks of 'dirty politics', however, as this reporter was unable to reach Ella Mayer for comment by press time, this is a matter of conjecture. In light of the complete acquittal of the sexual assault charge, the rumor mill which has been working over-time in regards to Mr. Richard's conduct can now, hopefully, be put to rest. Two such rumors were that Richard had used his position of authority in an attempt to seduce Pylatiuk and that he had openly groped her at the annual meeting in Brandon. Jeff Richard clearly did not abuse his authority in an endeavor to seduce a subordinate, nor did he openly grope Pylatiuk in a public arena. Neither of these presumptions were addressed in any way by either side during the trial.
Jeff Richard is extremely pleased to put this sordid affair behind him and focus on repairing his relationship with his wife, Magda which has understandably endured much strain as a result of the fiasco. Immediately following the acquittal, he expressed deep gratitude to all those who stood by him in his darkest hour. We at Thundervoice News wish him and his family all the best with the sincerest hope that there are nothing but brighter days ahead.
Jeff Richard
Distribution List:
theverdict@ctv.ca
publisher@thundervoice.ca
posted by Clare L. Pieuk at 1:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home