Trial Debacle Leads to Freedom for Nova Scotia Sex Offender

BarristerDespite what you hear or read, you can’t blame Ernest MacIntosh for today’s Supreme Court of Canada decision to quash his convictions for sex charges involving young boys in the 1970’s.

A successful Cape Breton businessman, MacIntosh was transferred by his employer to Singapore and then to India in 1994 where he remained until his extradition back to Canada in 2007 to face numerous counts of indecent assault and gross indecency charges stemming from allegations made by six young men in 1995.

When MacIntosh left Canada in 1994 there were no charges against him and he had no idea that charges may be laid. Over the years he travelled between India and Canada, renewing his Canadian passport from time to time as required by Canadian law.

He was not hiding from the law. Canadian authorities knew where he lived in New Delhi and had his phone number. Coincidentally, one of his neighbours was an RCMP officer who worked as a liaison in India.

MacIntosh finally became aware of two criminal charges in 1997 but was led to believe by Canada Passport authorities that the charges were not proceeding. He heard nothing more until nine years later, despite the fact that in 2001 fifteen more charges were brought against him and he renewed his passport in 2002. The Crown acknowledged their decision to extradite Mr. MacIntosh in 1997 but as you will read, did nothing about it for nine years.

In 2006 the Crown filed extradition proceedings in India, some 11 years after the first charges were laid and five years after the second group of charges were filed against him.

Mr. MacIntosh was brought back to Canada in June 2007 but did not receive complete mandatory disclosure from the Crown until eleven months later, an astonishing delay considering that the Crown had readied their cases years before.

He finally went to trial in July 2010 and was convicted on several of the charges. However, the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal overturned the convictions based on the 14 year delay of the Crown in proceeding against MacIntosh. But that wasn’t the only problem with the convictions.

The trial judge had so badly confused the evidence, even mixing up the witnesses and attributing evidence to one witness that was derived from another, that the Appeal Court determined that even absent the extraordinary delay, the judge’s errors would be cause for a new trial.

A key issue at the trial was centred on statements made by an alleged victim in 1995 and again in 2000 concerning details of the abuse he suffered, that simply could not be reconciled.

The trial judge acknowledged the discrepancies and based on the victim’s evidence and the testimony of another witness, determined that the assault did not take place at all. Yet despite this finding, the judge did not turn his attention to the issue of the victim’s overall credibility.

The finding that the alleged abuse did not occur as described, or at all, points to a flaw in the Crown’s preparation of their witness. In cases where a witness signs a comprehensive statement which he radically amends five years later, it is incumbent upon the Crown to test the evidence of the witness to ensure its reliability. Under cross-examination, this witness agreed that the event did not occur.

That the Supreme Court of Canada denied the Crown’s appeal in an oral judgment from the bench speaks to the Crown’s flimsy case. After all, an accused is not obliged to turn himself into the police or give a statement. It is the Crown’s job to bring an accused to trial.

Most notably, the Crown was unable to provide any rationale for their delay in prosecuting this case and cries for a public inquiry may well be revived now that our highest court has spoken.

Has an injustice occurred? Perhaps, but the fault lies with those paid to bring criminals to trial.


2 thoughts on “Trial Debacle Leads to Freedom for Nova Scotia Sex Offender

  1. If your weren’t at the trial you don’t know exactly how it played out. You can’t read the Appeal judges report (who was not at the trial either) and say you understand the case. There were 9 men that originally came forward. 3 dropped out due to stress reasons brought on by their childhood sexual abuse memories. 6 went to trial split up into two trials mainly to satify the defense team as one set of three were two brothers and a cousin and the other three not related or known to the first three. The abuse of the boys happened hundreds of times many years ago (early to mid 1970″s) and most of the sexual abuse was very similar (as is common with Phedophiles to keep doing a routine that works for them) “some” of the sexaul assults were so similar that at times it was hard for the victims to differ from one to another as far as where and when they took place. So, it’s not as if the judge was saying “they didn’t take place at all”. It was because of how our biased (heavily favored for the crimmial) sysytem says that the evidence has to be “beyond a reasonable doubt”. Due to the many similar/confusing sex events (which took place hundreds of times over many years) some events couldn’t be “exactly figured” as to when/where they took place (NOT that they didn’t take place). So, he was convicted on the charges were events could “exactly” be figured out in terms of where & time frames. Others were the “exat time” or “exact location at that time” were put aside (BUT THE JUDGE ALSO ADDED, “ITS NOT BECASUE i DID’NT BELIEVE THAT HAPPENED). The judge also added “THE DON’T BELIEVE MR MACINTOSH’S SIDE OF EVENTS. macintosh said “he DID have sex with the boys”, byt siad it was when they were 15, 16 & 17 and it was consentual. Where the judge belived the witness’s saying it happened much earlier when they were 8, 9, 10 ,11 12 & 13 years of age. MacIntosh was also convicted for similar sex crimes against boys before these trials (1983 & 1984). MacIntosh is a Socialpathic Phedophile that will “never” stop until he died. The Canadian “unjust” System failed these boys (now men) and their families, all future victims of MacIntosh, and ALL Canadians.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s