Judge criticized for failures to give reasons

"Our order directing a new trial is a terrible result for everyone involved in this proceeding," Justice David Doherty wrote for the court. "The trial judge's failure to give reasons, despite her repeated promises to do so, has frustrated the proper administration of justice."

In a post-script to the decision, the Appeal Court said the judge had displayed similar behaviour in the past.

"Nor is this the first time that this trial judge's failure to provide reasons has required this court to order a new trial," the Appeal Court said. "It must be the last time."

Roslyn Levine, a spokeswoman for Superior Court Chief Justice Forster Smith, told The Canadian Press that it would not be appropriate to contact the Toronto-based judge directly.

"As this matter is now before the Canadian Judicial Council, it would be inappropriate for Chief Justice Smith to comment on it," Levine said.

The new issue arose after Goodman dismissed all charges against Stanislaw Sliwka in March last year. He was charged after a distressed woman, who can only be identified as A.C., called 911 from an apartment in March 2014.

You might be interested in

{{type}}

{{title}}

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

{{type}}

{{title}}

• Dec 31, 1969
• Comments

Police were "horrified" to find A.C. had been badly beaten and needed immediate medical assistance, court records show. Her injuries included severe bruising, swelling, numerous cuts, and bleeding to her face and head.

During a nine-day trial, A.C. accused Sliwka of repeatedly physically and sexually assaulting her over many months when she lived with him. He denied the assaults. Instead, he called her a drunk who sometimes hurt herself when she fell. He also blamed her injuries on an unknown intruder that had broken into the apartment. His evidence contradicted police testimony.

At the end of the trial, Goodman acquitted him, saying she had carefully considered the matter. She said she did not intend the acquittal to be taken as sign she totally believed him or totally disbelieved A.C., but said that on the whole, she was not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of his guilt.

"My detailed written reasons will be released on Monday, March 14, 2016," Goodman said.

However, Goodman, who has sat on the court since 2000, failed to release her reasons as promised. Over the following six months, prosecution lawyers repeatedly asked for them, only to be told by Goodman's assistant that they would be forthcoming on a particular date. It never happened.

When the prosecution wrote directly to Goodman last September to say the Crown would argue the appeal should go ahead on the basis that there were no written reasons for the acquittal, the judge simply didn't respond.

At an appeal hearing this month, the prosecution argued the brief comments Goodman made at trial weren't intended to explain her decision and didn't count as reasons. As such, they said, the not-guilty verdict had to be overturned.

Sliwka argued in response that Goodman's brief comments were adequate, and that her decision was properly based on trial evidence. The Appeal Court disagreed.

"There is no way of knowing how the trial judge arrived at her verdicts," Doherty wrote.

In 2011, the Appeal Court ordered a new trial for a man charged with a weapons offence because Goodman took 25 months to deliver her ruling. In February, the court ordered a new hearing for woman challenging her detention order because Goodman had failed to deliver reasons for keeping her behind bars.

By Colin Perkel, The Canadian Press