On the surface, there isn’t much to connect these four legal dramas. These were disparate proceedings involving unique circumstances and sets of facts. Each case featured different RCMP or Competition
Bureau lead investigators. The same was true of the Crown prosecutors. Federal lawyers led the legal fights involving vice-admiral Mark Norman and the alleged bid-riggers. In the other two cases — involving Sen. Mike Duffy and the Nortel Three — the RCMP forwarded the matter to provincial prosecutors.
But, taken together, the proceedings reveal a weakness in the way the Crown and its investigators conducted their business.
In each instance, the RCMP and Competition Bureau arrived early at a theory of the alleged crime and hunted for evidence to support it. As a consequence, key potential witnesses were ignored or dismissed, crucial documents were left untouched, and Crown prosecutors tended not to stray far from the original narrative.
Bureau lead investigators. The same was true of the Crown prosecutors. Federal lawyers led the legal fights involving vice-admiral Mark Norman and the alleged bid-riggers. In the other two cases — involving Sen. Mike Duffy and the Nortel Three — the RCMP forwarded the matter to provincial prosecutors.
But, taken together, the proceedings reveal a weakness in the way the Crown and its investigators conducted their business.
In each instance, the RCMP and Competition Bureau arrived early at a theory of the alleged crime and hunted for evidence to support it. As a consequence, key potential witnesses were ignored or dismissed, crucial documents were left untouched, and Crown prosecutors tended not to stray far from the original narrative.
No comments:
Post a Comment