The complainant believed that the judge did not provide a fair trial, and that he was unable to file an application for a mistrial on the basis of ineffective counsel, due to his counsel being prevented by the judge from helping him.

webid-20150000

The complainant believed that the judge did not provide a fair trial, and that he was unable to file an application for a mistrial on the basis of ineffective counsel, due to his counsel being prevented by the judge from helping him. The complainant felt that the judge only accepted evidence to help the Crown’s case and refused to review other evidence and to recall witnesses when new evidence came up about them, ignored witness coercion and breach of their rights, and did not let his lawyers read what he had written to prove that they were “ineffective counsel”.

The judge commented on this case stating that she did not make any findings that the complainant’s counsel was ineffective.

The Council deemed that the judge acted appropriately by explaining to the complainant procedural options and their implications, and advising him to seek another counsel’s advice when his counsel was temporarily off the record. One of the most important duties of a judge is to assess credibility and make findings of fact about the evidence presented. The complainant was advised that his personal opinion or his disagreement with the judge’s decisions is not evidence of bias. A disagreement with a judge’s exercise of judicial discretion or with her decision-making is not an issue of conduct, and the matter was closed.

Back