Judge reserves decision in Windsor cop's sex assault trial
Article content
Following a five-day criminal trial, it now largely comes down to which of two veteran Windsor Police Service employees an out-of-town judge determines is the more believable.
In closing submissions before Ontario Court Justice Jennifer Myers on Friday, lawyers for both the defence and the prosecution argued the most important considerations in this ‘historical sexual assault’ case are credibility and reliability.
Recommended Videos
tap here to see other videos from our team.
Judge reserves decision in Windsor cop's sex assault trial Back to video
tap here to see other videos from our team.
Staff-Sgt. Ken Price is charged with four counts of sexual assault stemming from alleged instances of workplace harassment and unwanted physical contact between 2011 and 2015.
Both the female complainant, whose identity is protected under a court-imposed publication ban, and the accused testified during the downtown trial.
Defence lawyer Dan Scott said his client “unequivocally … denied any wrongdoing.”
The complainant spent three days on the witness stand. “Can I sit here and say she doesn’t sound credible? No,” said Scott.
But Price’s lawyer argued the accuser’s testimony during the Crown’s questioning, and then under the defence’s cross-examination, sounded too much “as if she was reading a story” and that it too closely matched the transcripts of earlier statements given to investigators.
Crown prosecutor Nicolas de Montigny, however, described that as giving “consistent, detailed evidence” and that the complainant remained “unshaken in cross-examination” by the defence.
All the alleged assaults took place at the Windsor police west-side training branch, where Price, a member of the emergency services unit, was an instructor and the complainant had volunteered in “dynamic” live scenarios where the training includes officers engaged in “close-quarter battles.”
Scott said the complainant couldn’t recall the month or even the “season” when some of the alleged assaults took place, and while she took notes, she never documented the assaults Price is alleged to have committed.
The complainant had testified she didn’t want to be “triggered” by recalling the trauma experienced and that, while she could not recall exact dates, she clearly remembers details of the alleged events.
When it comes to sexual assault and remembering traumatic events, the judge interjected at one point, saying, “memory is a funny thing,” particularly when it comes to later recalling dates.
But Justice Myers also interjected during the Crown’s closing submission, asking about why the trial had not heard from purported witnesses to some of the alleged assaults: “What should I do with that?”
The “lack of confirmatory evidence … your honour can consider that,” de Montigny replied. “It doesn’t mean events didn’t occur as she described.”
The alleged interactions in question, he added, happened quickly, “in seconds.”
It wasn’t until years later that the Windsor Police Service’s professional standards branch learned of the allegations, and when they did, Ontario’s Special Investigations Unit was alerted, and “that’s what brings us here today,” Scott told the court.
The complainant has also filed a complaint with the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario.
Scott said the judge could only convict if she felt the Crown’s evidence pointed to Price’s guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt,” something he said the prosecution had failed to do.
Justice Myers said she would announce her verdict on Wednesday.
