Tim Young's Right to Privacy while vandalizing and breaking conditions of release

March 28, 2006

We arrived in Court shortly around 10:30AM. We never did get the 911 audio as promised by the Crown Attorney before our scheduled trial day. We sat in Court for about an hour as other items on their agenda came up. At one point the Duty Counsel came up to us and asked to talk to us for the Crown. I had brief case, chart and bin of evidence so we decided that my wife would stay with that and I'd go talk with the Duty Counsel. The Duty Counsel informed me that the Crown did not have the 911 tape. He said that if it were him he would make a Motion, when before the Judge, to Dismiss on Lack of Disclosure. When I came back out and into the Court Room I saw Officer Moore sitting next to my wife (we always sit at the last row on the Innocent side). As I approached I shook my finger at Officer Moore saying "No, no, no, conversation ended". Noel said that right after I had left he approached her saying the Crown asked him to find out if we were planning to move. Noel said "And what does that have to do with anything." He said that "If we were moving than we could just drop everything because there would be no reason to proceed." Noel told me that she proceeded to say "If we sell the house right now we would lose at least $20,000. We purchased it as an investment to fix up and resell." She was starting to say something else when I had arrived and cut the conversation short. She just looked at him, smiled and said "Auh" turning her hands out. He left and went off someplace. As our turn came up the Judge asked if we had gotten the disclosure we had requested and we said no the tape had not been turned over to us. Crown Attorney DeLuzia said that they did not have the 911 tape in their possession. (Guess Crown Attorney Burgess had not told her that he had admitted that it was in their possession during the last Court Hearing). I asked the Judge if the Crown was in Contempt of Court for failure to turn over the tape. The Judge, said well, no. The Judge asked if we wished to have the date postponed to allow for more time for the 911 tape to appear or to proceed without it. It was obvious to me that they had no intention to come up with the tape so delaying the trial date again only serves the Crown's purpose of delaying justice for a wrongful prosecution. Justice delayed is Justice denied. I told the Judge we did not want to delay justice any longer. The Judge said that the trial would start at 3PM. (Subsequently just before a lunch break, several other cases were settled and we were told it would start right after lunch break and be back at 2PM. March 28, 2006; 2PM The Trial

February 29, 2006

The issue of the Motion to Dismiss we had filed the week earlier was again addressed. I asked whether the Judge had ruled on the Motion. The Judge stated that the Motion would be dealt with at the trial and set a date of March 28, 2006. He also said that the issue of the Crown's refusal to give full disclosure could then again be addressed at the same time. He also asked how long ago did I make that request for disclosure and I advised him it was the end of November 2005. The Duty Counsel came up to me and said that these were good things and that I should write another Motion regarding the Crowns refusal to turn over full disclosure. The Judge told Mr. Young that at that time, he would need to make a decision on how he would be proceeding.

February 21, 2006

During a recess in the morning court procedure we were asked by the Duty Council if we planned to accept the offer from the Crown for a mutual peace bond. We stated we had decided that we felt it was not in our best interest and would like to state the reasons why in Court. He said that was not necessary and we did not get the opportunity to do so. You can read what we had prepared here. The Duty Council informed the Crown of our decision to decline and either the Duty Council or the Crown informed Mr. Young.

At one stage during the recess I went outside and Noel stayed inside (usually we stay together since Mr. Young had begun his harassment). I wasn't outside very long when Mr. Young came outside with his wife and passed close to me saying "Are you F*ckin crazy, you're going on a trip" (see below). I was rather shocked and went back inside immediately, Noel was just coming out the door of the courtroom so I told her what he said. She said I was shaking and that when she saw them get up to go outside right after me she realized that something might happen. She commented that we already knew he had no respect for the law so it's no surprise he has no respect for the courts either.

It became very apparent to us and thousands of people on the internet that Mr. Young and Officer Moore have a special relationship. I'm very concerned that the Trip Mr. Young referred to when he again violated (six times now) his release conditions was a reference to what is known in our First Nations Communities as a Starlight Cruise.

In our Court appearance today before a different Judge, we again raised our serious concerns regarding the Crown's refusal to provide us with full disclosure. As this single act is the greatest tool the State has in preventing wrongful convictions, our Federal Government's guidelines insist that charges be screened and full disclosure be fore with provided to the defendants so that wrongful convictions do not occur. The Judge asked me what further disclosure I required. I said the booking tapes from the cell area of the Bancroft OPP the night I was arrested. The Crown stated that the OPP Bancroft Office do not have a video camera at their jail cells. I then asked for the Notes of the 8 Officers involved in this case. The Crown said something to the Judge that I did not hear and the Judge told me "that the Crown said that you can't have them". I then asked if I could please at least have the 911 tapes. The Crown to my shock and amazement spoke up saying we have the 911 tapes and it will be made available to you. There was then a brief discussion with regard to not knowing what format this evidence would be in, i.e. tape or transcript. The Judge suggested that perhaps it could be in the format of a CD. To which I replied that would be fine.

February 14, 2006

Second appearance. We were prepared to move forward with our motion to dismiss and further argument that there was a mountain of exculpatory evidence that the Crown is refusing to turn over for disclosure. The Judge remarked that after the adjournment we would discuss this mountain of exculpatory evidence. When we returned we again asked the Crown to keep trying to get all disclosure requested.

Mr. Young stated that he wished to have the case resolved. The Crown offered a solution for our consideration that in lieu of a trial, a peace bond between the two parties be agreed to. We stated we would take it under consideration but needed further time to discuss the proposal. The next Court date to reply to the proposal is February 21, 2006 We are of the understanding that our motion to dismiss is being handled by a simultaneously by a different judge.

On our second Court appearance, we were able to speak with the Judge and convey our major concern regarding the Crown withholding disclosure, namely Officer's Notes and Occurrence Reports, 911 tapes etc. The Judge seemed genuinely concerned that the Crown was refusing to disclose exculpatory evidence. I commend this Judge for his efforts to secure a fair trial for myself. We were hoping that the Judge would be able to rule on our Motion to Dismiss that we filed with the Court several days earlier. The Judge stated that he had nothing in front of him about a motion. I stated that I have another one right here and was going to submit it to the Court. The Judge said to us that in the event that he were to hear the case, seeing the motion before the trial would be a conflict of interest to him. He would there fore not be able to try the case himself. We then did not push the issue that day.

January 24, 2006

Mr. Young stated he had not yet found a lawyer. The judge allowed a continence for Mr. Young to find a lawyer.

First appearance before the court. Our position was that we were still trying to get disclosure. There were 8 police officers involved in this the case and we needed their notes and all the 911 tapes we initially asked for from the Crown. The presiding Judge said that we would deal with that during our next court date of February 14, 2006.

Interestingly, Mr. Young decided to sit himself in the seat right in front of us where he could periodically turn around and glare. That not being sufficient, he had mutter "F*ckin goof".