 | ||
| March 4, 2002: We now have the transcript of the proceedings described below
Prosecutor McNab misbehaving Nov. 18, 2001: injusticebusters is assisting Tracy Marcotte, a young person who was charged with theft over $5000 from her workplace and who was assigned Roger Kergoat as her legal aid lawyer. Following our suggestion, Ms. Marcotte fired Kergoat and requested the disclosure. It arrived with a letter like the one found here. Shortly afterwords, the prosecutor, McNab called her and strongly suggested she plead guilty. Then, less than two days before the preliminary hearing court date, McNab called her and said he would be asking for an adjournment to give her time to look over some new disclosure which turned out to be a three pound envelope of sales slips: more paper in a completely circumstantial case based on a complaint by a person and never investigated by the police, accompanied by a letter designed to intimidate and once more asking for a guilty plea. At the hearing, Nov. 20, the judge granted an adjournment to the Crown, although McNab tried to make out that it was the accused's fault the adjournment was necessary. The judge made it very clear that the delay was the fault of the Crown and that it would in no way affect her right to a timely trial. A new date was set for Dec. 20. Right after Court adjourned, Richard Klassen informed McNab that Tracy would like receipts for six months prior and six months after the dates the Crown is claiming she stole the money. Next, Tracy appealed Employment Insurance's denial of her claim and, with the assistance of Richard Klassen, won that appeal. McNab passes intimidation torch to Brent Klause: not funny. Nov. 29, 2001: Today, Tracy Marcotte received a call from the new prosecutor on the case, Brent Klause. He further intimidated her and tried to force her into the position of hiring a lawyer. Klause told her that Richard Klassen would not be allowed to act for her in this matter. Klause called Klassen a "wanna-be lawyer", which injusticebusters consider defamatory. (See "Why we hate lawyers," one of our first postings to this site.) Klause then asked Tracy if she even knew what a preliminary hearing is. Dec. 2: Tracy Marcotte formally asked the new Crown, in writing, for the disclosure Klassen had informally requested from McNab verbally. Klause told her to appear in Court for a pretrial hearing Dec. 10 to have a judge decide if he was required to turn this material over to her. Klassen gets kicked out of court for shaking his head "no" Dec. 10: Prosecutor Brent Klause and accused Tracy Marcotte appeared before provincial court judge Marty Irwin. Marcotte was accompanied by an entourage composed of her boyfriend Mike, Angela Geworsky, Richard Klassen and Sheila Steele. Steele sat in the back row of the small courtroom directly behind Klassen. Klause immediately lied to the Court and offered improper speculation. He stated that Marcotte was undefended and wanted Richard Klassen to speak for her, that Klassen "is a person who is involved in many lawsuits alleging wrongdoing by the prosecution and that Klassen had written Klause a letter threatening to sue him after Klause had called Marcotte to tell her about this hearing. Klause claimed he had given Marcotte some friendly advice that she should get a lawyer, had explained to her the seriousness of the charges she faced: minutes later he had received a call from Klassen who he told he would not talk to about this case and hung up. Klause went on to say that the disclosure Marcotte wanted might indeed be relevant as, obviously, your honour, this is a theft case and she wants to say she wasn't the only one doing it. (At this point, Steele whispered loudly in Tracy's direction, "No, No, No.") Irwin intervened at this point and joined the Crown in intimidating Marcotte, patronizingly lecturing her about the importance of getting a lawyer and the seriousness of the charges. Finally Marcotte was allowed to speak and she stated she wanted Richard Klassen to speak for her. She further stated that Klause had intimidated her and had laughed at her. Klause interrupted Tracy to address the judge, saying "I may have snickered but I was not intimidating. It was a friendly snicker" and Marcotte said, "I was intimidated." Klause then went on to tell Irwin that the last hearing had been adjourned by mutual consent. Steele was continuing to whisper No, No, No, and Geworsky was also shaking her head. and, eventually, Klassen shook his head, once. Out of nowhere, Irwin pointed at Klassen and said, "Would you stand, please?" Klassen stood. "What's your name?" "Richard Klassen. May I speak?" "No, you may not. You may leave my courtroom." As Klassen left, he said, "I'll be back." Judge Irwin immediately called him back. Klassen said, "Now that you have called me back, may I speak?" "Shut up," says Irwin. I'm warning you, Mr. Klassen, that you are that close to being in contempt of this court." We could hardly believe our eyes and ears. Never have we seen the rights of a defendant so flagrantly abused. Nor have we heard of a citizen threatened with contempt for doing no more than shake his head. Klause's character assassination of Klassen to Irwin is, quite possibly litigational. There are two lawuits so far claiming prosecutorial wrongdoing and both arise out of the Foster Parent trials where the wrongdoing was flagrant and will be shown to be so. They are properly filed in the Court of Queen's Bench and have absolutely nothing to do with injusticebusters' helping Tracy Marcotte defend herself against a charge of which she claims she is totally innocent. Without even receiving full dislosure, without having had any hearing at all, officers of the court are treating her as a guilty person. Shame, shame. This sham hearing was unnerving for Tracy Marcotte. She did not hear Steele's loud whispers (Steele's attempt to get her to exercise her rights and object to being treated so shabbily) although they were audible to everyone else. Marcotte was shaken afterwards but now that she understands that this was NOT a normal courtroom experience, she has resolved to return and exercise her right to the best defense she can get and she knows it won't likely be a Saskatchewan lawyer who gets it for her. |
Hatchen and Munsen trial coverage (Might they have fared better without counsel?) The Crown feels obligated to go beyond advising defendants of their right to counsel and downright scares them with horrific notions of what might happen to them if they choose to run their own case. We have run several small cases successfully -- getting fair dispositions and, on occasion, expressions of gratitude from judges. We are certainly able to assist ourselves and others in conducting a case. The case is in the disclosure. Carol Bunko-Ruys Reports | The Thompson papers | Dueck's notes | The Ivan Cohen case | The Monique Turenne case | |
