Charges against a Calgary man accused of raping a woman over a 10-hour period nearly two years ago have been unexpectedly stayed.
Crown prosecutor Karuna Ramakrishnan issued the stay after the 44-year-old complainant, who recanted her story under cross-examination by defence lawyer Rebecca Snukal on Wednesday, failed to show up in court on Friday for further questioning.
She had been ordered to do so by Court of Queen's Bench Justice Sandy Park, so Ramakrishnan could reconsider her position.
John Francis Dionne, 43, had faced charges of sexual assault causing bodily harm, kidnapping, assault causing bodily harm and uttering death threats in connection with the alleged incident on Oct. 28, 2008.
His first trial ended in a mistrial in June, because of an issue with one of the jurors, and was rescheduled for this week.
The woman initially outlined in detail what she says occurred during the ordeal, but when cross-examined, she couldn't remember specific details.
Then, when asked why she would accept a ride from the man she claimed had raped her for 10 hours she became frustrated and denied it even happened.
"I'm lying about everything," she told Snukal.
"Hurry along because I'm lying about everything. He's not a rapist . . . so there, that's it. End of it . . . he didn't rape me.
"Let Mr. John Francis go free. He's not a rapist. It's over. That's all I have to say. Let him out."
Dionne, who had been in custody since his arrest, was to be released some time later on Friday.
The Crown has a year to revive the charges, but seldom does so unless new evidence arises.
Link:
http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/Woman+admits+lying+about+rape/3510190/story.html
Posts
4 comments:
This is exactly my my point Slwerner. The prosecutor should have had the woman in this case arrested on the spot, when she admitted her lie.
Attorneys are like skilled surgeons who are specially trained to weed out and dissect lies.
Prosecutors don't look for the truth, a good example of this is an innocent man sat in prison for months.
Perverting the course of justice charges are becoming more common, but not in America.
I cant wait for the collapse of the dollar so that we can end the Prison Industrial Complex.
Arod99k - "This is exactly my my point Slwerner"
Still looking to pick a fight I see...
Some how you managed to miss all those other stories wherein LE did nothing wrong, and in most, did proper investigations; but you pick up on just this one example, from an incident from 2 years ago in which a woman finally admitted, under oath, during a hearing before the court; and morph it into a general indictment against ALL of LE (prosecutors in particular). And, yet, somehow, you imagine yourself as some great thinker for putting 1 and 1 together and getting 1,000,000?
One of the problems we actually have in regards to the reaction to FRA’s is the presumption that a certain groups MUST be guilty and be to blame. For gender-feminists, that groups would, of course, be men. A man accused MUST be guilty. Men MUST be behind the “rape culture” which fosters so many rapes…
We’ve all heard that crap, and recognize it for the shallow, anti-intellectual form of thinking it represents. It’s as if it’s a form of “Junk Science” – predetermine the outcome one wished to see, and then try to back-fit extant facts to match, and simply imagining that any missing piece actually exist.
That approach is really quite laughable.
So, how is it any different than, say, someone on the other side always envisioning their own target group as the ones who are guilty and to be blamed? It’s not really any different, now is it? It’s the same shallow, anti-intellectual thought patterns at work, the same style of “Junk Science”.
Always looking through a lens trying to reach YOUR predefined outcome is just the reverse side of that same coin. And, purposefully ignoring the many examples which run counter to you preferred explanation does really help your case any. I just demonstrates that you know you cannot paste the explanation that you’d have us believe is a one-size-fits-all-cases model, over those cases. And, you know that if you did try, it would only serve to prove your pet theory hopelessly narrow-minded, and ill-thought out.
Yes, there are case that prosecutors get wrong. But, percentage wise, it’s perhaps a few percent. The goal should be to eliminate even those few mistakes, to be sure, but trying to project the few missteps into a over-arching refutation of all prosecutions is, again, much like the tactics we’ve seen from the gender-feminist side.
Honesty should be our guiding principle. Let the evidence take us where it will. If it shows that LE made mistakes, or acted improperly, then so be it. And, if it shows that they acted properly, then, let’s be honest enough to say so.
Still, the question you “ducked” so long lingers…how do you justify your claim that the women aren’t the problem”?
You do realize that by your own logic that Sylvia Saldaña must also not have been the problem, do you not? Yet, by your silence, you demonstrate that you continue to stand by that statement you made regarding the women who make FRA’s.
Sorry, but anyone who’s looked at the issue with even a modicum of objectivity realizes that the women are the main problem – they start the ball rolling with their allegations. Any other errors that arise only happen because they’ve made an allegation, in the first place. You’ve never been able to argue around that – and your silence isn’t making your case either.
Arod99k - ”The prosecutor should have had the woman in this case arrested on the spot, when she admitted her lie.”
Since this was in court, the arrest order would have to have come from the judge. And, by failing to show up, she violated a court order, so it is likely that a bench warrant was issued for her arrest.
The problem here, as it is with so many reports, is that the press fails to give pertinent details. The press is yet another of the “players” in the broader issue of FRA’s. Yet, in your narrow-minded hunt for prosecutorial misconduct, you typically fail to consider anything or anyone else. It’s as if your blanket absolution of the accusers also extends to the press and public, with only prosecutors ever being to blame in your world.
Arod99k - ”Prosecutors don't look for the truth, a good example of this is an innocent man sat in prison for months.”
Quite a bit of speculation on your part here. We don’t know what other evidence they though they had, but since he was also accused of kidnapping and making death threats, it likely that a JUDGE ordered a high bond. And, if you’d bother to read for comprehension, you’d have noticed that it was the prosecutor who “stayed” the charges as soon as the (unnamed by the press) liar recanted. The prosecutions case may have appeared very solid, even if mislead. But, given the lack of detail, we can only speculate.
Another aspect not detailed in the press report is that this seems to have occurred during some form of pre-trial hearing, perhaps an evidentiary hearing. It may be that the information about her getting a ride from him may have only recently come to light – thus a hearing to determine whether it would be admissible – and it seems to be only at that point that the liar finally confessed. If it had been known previously, then it should have been part of the earlier trial – likely leading to an acquittal, after any competent defense attorney would have hammer such a point home to the jury..
Arod99k - ”Perverting the course of justice charges are becoming more common, but not in America.”
That would be because there is no Perverting the Course of Justice felony statute in the US. It’s a law that needs to be enacted. Sorry to disappoint you , again, but prosecutors are not to blame for the lack of laws to deal with false accusers (although I suppose you’ll never-the-less still believe that they are).
And, we are given (by the press, again) no information about any possible charges that the liar will now face. Just because the press doesn’t report it does not mean that it isn’t going to happen. Relying on the press to get accurate and pertinent information can lead to people being seriously misinformed.
Who knows, if potential jurors in a small jurisdiction relied on press accounts of a woman in a custody dispute being nearly killed by being stabbed in the neck, they might be so prejudiced by the press that they might, if they were on the jury, ignore evidence presented by defense, and end up sending an innocent man to prison.
Just saying…
Arod99k - "Prosecutors don't look for the truth"
Since you overlooked the story about Colorado prosecutor Ken Buck that I posted a link to yesterday, let me give you a taste of what a prosecutor dealing with a real case faces:
"In explaining to an alleged date-rape victim why he wasn't pressing charges in her case, Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck told the woman that her prior relations with the alleged attacker could be used against her if she pursued the matter.
The conversation the Republican Senate nominee had in 2005 with a then-21-year-old University of Northern Colorado student surfaced this week through an audio recording the victim made without Buck's consent that was released by the liberal group ProgressNow.
In that recording, Buck said he thought her case — she alleged she was raped by an ex-boyfriend whom she invited over when she was drunk — would be tough to prove.
that if she tried to compel him to prosecute, her alleged perpetrator's lawyer could bring up "possible motives" for her filing the charges to begin with — including the fact she says she had a miscarriage while pregnant with his child more than a year before the incident occurred."
Post a Comment