The trial of a man charged with violent sexual assault almost fell through over an abuse of the Teams application, in which one of his victims recorded a private conversation between him and his attorney without their knowledge.
• Also read: Domestic violence: He gets 4.5 years in prison
• Also read: Mental health is the stepchild of health and justice systems
• Also read: Therapy for Violent Men: Organizations Affected by Long Delays
“The present case is a perfect example of the unintended consequences of increasing use […] Technology,” summarizes Supreme Court Justice François Dadour in a recent decision that will have significant implications for the trial of Samuel Comeau.
The magistrate was forced to issue several draconian orders after the unidentifiable lead complainant allegedly flouted attorney-client privilege, “a fundamental and primary rule of law.”
Specifically, the judge ordered the Crown Prosecutor handling the case, several of her colleagues with knowledge of the case, and the Sûreté du Québec investigator to be dismissed from the ongoing case.
Only an attorney for the chief of law and prosecution, who was denied access to confidential information after the incident, can take care of the file afterwards.
The unfortunate event happened on October 12, 2021 amid the COVID-19 pandemic when Comeau was due to undergo his pre-release investigation.
Several serious allegations
The 32-year-old man faces 17 counts of aggravated assault, threats, incarceration, sexual assault, sexual assault with assault and use of a replica firearm in committing the assault and murder. He would have had four victims between 2011 and 2019.
Photo from Samuel Comeau’s Facebook page
Pictured here is Samuel Comeau in 2011. He is charged with 17 counts ranging from ordinary to aggravated assault, threats, incarceration, sexual assault, sexual assault causing physical harm and using a fake firearm in the commission of assault and sexual assault.
“The alleged facts are serious: there are allegations of high domestic violence, including beating, kicking, hair pulling, spitting, lip biting, sexual assault with penetration, throat punching, beating while the complainant was pregnant, death threats, use of a firearm, etc threatening the applicant and inserting the weapon into her body,” says Judge Dadour.
In a second case, he is accused of three assault offenses against three minors at three different times.
Note that Samuel Comeau is still presumed innocent of these charges.
The complainant logs everything
During the hearing, defense attorney Me David Leclair asked for a confidential interview with Comeau, which he was granted.
“Confidentiality had to be maintained by locking everyone out of the room. The clerk has disabled the recording [des micros dans la salle]and the special constable in charge of the room locked the doors,” describes Judge Dadour.
However, the main victim on file was connected through the Teams platform and was able to attend the interview as they were never disconnected.
She even filmed the twelve-minute conversation on her cell phone, we learn in the decision. She was able to read several pieces of information that she would normally never have had access to, including the strategy they believed they were pursuing in the file.
The Crown even admitted that what it had done constituted, in part, unlawful interception of private communications.
The Sûreté du Québec investigator on the file, Valéry St-Pierre, even asked the applicant to take notes, as he probably did not understand that this was a privileged conversation between a lawyer and his client.
never seen
The defense called for a stay of Samuel Comeau’s trial, arguing that his right to a fair trial was now compromised.
But the judge did not agree to the defense motion. However, he imposed a list of several “amends.”
A closed hearing, possibly for the first time in Canada, where the Crown will be barred at its suggestion (ex parte) and where the victim will have to testify about the incident.
This practice, which, according to many participants in the judicial community, has almost never happened, will therefore prevent the presence of the prosecutor, who will not be able to object to possible questions from the defense.
“It’s something very unusual for me. […] I don’t claim to have seen everything, but I’ve never seen that, a decision as such. We can see that the judge put a lot of thought into achieving this,” argued retired judge Nicole Gibeault.
“It’s about restoring the attack on the integrity of the process. But it also allows the procedures to continue without ordering a stop, it is a very important file that must be carried out to the end, “she adds.
A total of 13 actions were taken by Judge Dadour to avoid staying the case.
“The combination of all these measures and their cumulative effect restores the fairness of the process and repairs the damage to the integrity of the judicial system. This combination of remedies achieves the balance point sought in this case,” he believes.
Do you have any information about this story that you would like to share with us?
Do you have a scoop that might be of interest to our readers?
Write to us or call us directly at 1-800-63SCOOP.