Canadian Railroads > "Habeas Corpus" and the Lac Megantic accused.

News today that lawyer for the defence in the case of locomotive engineer Tom Harding are asking for a dismissal of the case because it is taking too long to come to trial.

​"Habeas Corpus" is the clause in the Magna Carta which guarantees timely justice for the accused in cases bought before the King or Queen. The Magna Carta has been the foundation of British and Commonwealth justice for many hundred years.

Often, the accused are held in "remand centres", jails in which they wait until they go to trial. Quite often, the time served in remand awaiting trial is the "time served" by the convicted.

​The issue is that there is a shortage of judges and funding for the Court system in Quebec, and a huge backlog of cases awaiting trial.

​The reality here is that a "plea bargain" could be likely in this case because the Court is under pressure to comply with Habeas Corpus.

The citizens of Lac Megantic would like a trial to take place, and so would the accused who would like their opinions heard.

However, the media is reporting that the case may be dismissed if not dealt with shortly.

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/30/16 19:45 by eminence_grise.

I don't know what the 'speedy trial' rules are for Quecbec, but in Texas, it was 180 days, if the defense hasn't asked for a continuance.  And I believe it still is.   

NormSchultze Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't know what the 'speedy trial' rules are for
> Quecbec, but in Texas, it was 180 days, if the
> defense hasn't asked for a continuance.  And I
> believe it still is. 

It has been four years. Tom Harding is out on bail but would like to get on with his life.

He made some operational errors which caused the runaway and subsequent loss of life however the 47 counts of manslaughter he was charged with at the time seems harsh.

Crown and the defence have asked for several continuances.

​Recently, several criminal cases were abandoned in Alberta because they had not been dealt with in a timely manner (six years in one case).

An out of court settlement seems likely.
 

Witnesses forget key points, or die. Sensitive info makes it into the public realm.

In Mr Harding's case, his company's practices made a bad situation infinitely worse.

Posted from Android

The other issue is the various civil suits regarding this issue.

​Families of the victims have been offered a one time "take it or leave it" financial package in compensation for their loss. Some have taken it, while others have launched damage suits for more compensation.

This is a lump sum to be shared between the families.

​I'm not sure what a dismissal of the criminal charges or a plea bargain would have on the civil law suits in this case.

A few months ago, clearing of the site was completed, and plans for rebuilding downtown Lac Megantic are in progress.

The greatest number of fatalities took place in a building housing a restaurant and bar.

​The owner of the popular night spot rebuilt in another part of town. He lost family and friends in the incident, and felt it important for the community and his family that he quickly rebuild and re-open.

I visited Lac Megantic decades ago and it was a pretty, friendly Quebec town right on the frontier with northern Maine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/16 13:14 by eminence_grise.

Heard on the CBC this morning that there are a number of cases in Ontario that are facing dismissial because of the time it's taking to get to trial.
This is all resulting from a ruling made by the Canadian Supreme Court.

 In 1990 the most important case regarding undue delay was Regina vs Askov. This caused considerable chaos in the court system. Because the Supreme Court did not set specific time limits there was much room for argument. It was a boon for barristers! It was left up to the trial  judge (and frequently subsequent appellate justices) to determine whether the delay was reasonable. Only delays that could be attributable to the Crown were to be considered. Obviously, adjournments requested by the defence were not to be considered to be part of the delay for the purpose of these arguments. The most recent case, Regina vs Jordan, establishes 30 months as the limit for Superior Court cases. That is from the time the charge is laid until the conclusion of the trial.

The derailment occurred on July 6, 2013. According to press reports, the charges were laid almost two years later: in June, 2015.  There is still room for delay arguments, of course, based on Regina vs Askov and the principles of "Habeas Corpus". It will be interesting.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/03/16 18:24 by DrawingroomA.

> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> >It has been four years. Tom Harding is out on bail
> but would like to get on with his life.
>
>

The court system certainly has it's problems, however I'd imagine there are 47 victims that would have liked to get on with their lives as well.  >  

Any recent progress on this matter?

As the anniversary approaches, the topic may get more attention.