http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ca ... entencing-1.3558768
Law experts say the "Dear Jury" letter David Stephan posted to Facebook after being convicted in the death of his son Ezekiel may come back to haunt him when he faces the court to be sentenced. On Tuesday, a jury found David and his wife, Collet Stephan, guilty of failing to provide the necessaries of life to their toddler Ezekiel, who died from meningitis. The next day, David posted a stinging rebuke of the way the case was handled, addressed directly to jurors. The online message blasted what David described as the "deception, drama and trickery" of the Crown, which he said has led to "a dangerous precedent being set in Canada." Criminal defence lawyer Adriano Iovinelli said publicly lashing out at the justice system can be risky for someone awaiting sentencing after a criminal conviction. "This individual is still before the courts and is criticizing both the Crown prosecutor and essentially the trial process itself, and that never bodes well for someone who is appearing before the courts for sentencing," he said.
#############################################################################Dear Jury,
I deeply Love each one of you and appreciate the tremendous sacrifice that you have made over the last 8 weeks. I only wish that you could've seen how you were being played by the crowns deception, drama and trickery that not only led to our key witnesses being muzzled, but has also now led to a dangerous precedent being set in Canada. The flood gates have now been opened and if we do not fall in line with parenting as seen fit by the government, we all stand in risk of criminal prosecution. Remember what the crown prosecutors closing remarks were to combat the fact that the ill equipped ambulance resulted in Ezekiel's brain death. She communicated that this was not about him dying, but rather about whether or not his life was endangered at any point due to our actions. How many parents have lost children for various reasons, all of which could be concluded that the child's life was endangered and that the parents should have been able to foresee it? How many parents have had close calls to losing a child, wherein it could be concluded that the child's life was endangered and the parents should have been able to foresee it? Whether medical attention is sought or not and your child lives, it is of no consequence. It is only about whether or not it can be proven that at some point your child's life was endangered, and if so you may find yourselves in the same boat as us.
The flood gates have now been opened and my main concern is no longer for Collet and I, but rather for Canadian's as a whole.
May Heaven help us all!
######################################################################################################
Peter Sankoff, who teaches in the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta, said the Facebook post goes beyond "just expressing dismay with the verdict" and could have some impact on the sentence the judge ultimately hands down. "It's sort of impugning the repute of both the Crown and the system," Sankoff said of Stephan's letter to jurors. "So it's definitely possible the Crown would try to tender it in sentencing and to suggest that it's an aggravating feature that should be considered." David and Collet Stephan are due back in court in June, when a sentencing date is to be set. The maximum penalty for failing to provide the necessaries of life is five years in prison. | 
發表於 2016-4-29 09:19
|