When police showed up at Melanie Hutton’s Kelowna, B.C., home in November 2021, they found her covered in blood in the bathroom and her then-husband Jeffrey McLean “in an aggressive manner.” She said she found him standing over her.
In court filings, she described a gruesome scene in which blood from a head wound appeared on Ms MacLean’s mouth as whispers were heard in her ear. According to allegations in a civil lawsuit against MacLean, he told a 911 driver that his wife was “bleeding like a pig.”
Hutton said he was told by police and prosecutors that the criminal case against MacLean in British Columbia’s Supreme Court would be a “slam dunk” and he was charged with assault causing bodily harm and resisting arrest.
However, this lawsuit was dismissed in August 2023. Not because of a lack of evidence, but because the Crown took too long to bring the case to trial under a series of strict timelines that have reorganized the way criminal cases are handled since a landmark ruling in 2016. By the Supreme Court of Canada.
Supporters say the so-called Jordan decision speeds up legal proceedings and strengthens Charter rights to speedy justice.
But Jordan’s legacy is controversial, with some victims saying the time limit gives criminals an advantage. Eight years after the rule was enacted, deadline-breaking lawsuits continue, but these represent only a small portion of the total.
A review of statistics provided by states and territories shows that since early last year, more than 400 criminal cases nationwide have been dismissed, suspended or withdrawn as a result of Jordan’s challenges.
Some of the defendants were accused of sexual assault, child exploitation, fraud, and drug trafficking. Murder cases have also been abandoned in the past.
The case against MacLean was one of the cases dismissed.
Ms Hutton said she was thrown into “absolute abyss of despair and shame” after her case was dismissed.
Prosecutors cited factors including the coronavirus pandemic and MacLean’s lack of a lawyer for delays and failures in the case.
Hutton thought otherwise and sent a one-line email to prosecutors.
“I said, ‘This is your responsibility,'” Hutton said. Hutton currently lives in Ontario with the couple’s two children.
None of the allegations in Hutton’s civil suit against MacLean have been proven or tested in court, and in his response, MacLean “denies all allegations.”
‘Revolutionary’ verdict
The Jordan decision imposed a “presumptive ceiling” of 18 months from indictment to the actual or anticipated conclusion of a trial in a district court and 30 months in a high court.
Exceeding this limit, except in “exceptional circumstances,” was found by the country’s highest court to violate the Canadian Charter, which requires criminal defendants “to be tried within a reasonable time.”
Exactly how long “reasonable” meant was unclear until the High Court’s decision in RV Jordan.
The case would change criminal law practice across the country, but Tony Paisana, a British Columbia lawyer involved in the case, didn’t realize at the time just how significant it would become.
“Looking back, it’s certainly hard to say that we, including ourselves, really expected this to come out the way it did and how revolutionary it would be,” he said in an interview. .
The case began in December 2008, when a suspected drug dealer named Barrett Jordan in Langley, British Columbia, along with numerous others whom police accused of running a “dial-a-dope” operation, was arrested. It started modestly with the arrest of a man.
It took more than four years from the time Jordan was indicted until the first trial was completed.
He unsuccessfully argued that his Charter right to a timely trial was violated in both the BC Supreme Court and the Court of Appeal before the case ultimately reached the Supreme Court of Canada.
Paisana and colleagues Eric Gottardi and Richard Peck argued in their filing that the right to a timely trial dates back hundreds of years, citing 1215 Magna Carta.
Paisana said the High Court’s decision in Jordan “fully achieved its intended purpose of speeding up criminal trials.”
“And with the participation of various judicial participants, including the judge, the Crown, defense attorneys and defendants, everyone begins to pay attention to the timeliness of the trial,” he said.
“This is a chronic problem that exists in our system, and Jordan was what we in law call a ‘clarion call’ to change the culture surrounding criminal justice.”
He said that prior to this case, cases had been put on hold due to unreasonable delay, but Jordan has set a new standard.
“When things are resolved more quickly, there is more trust in the justice system,” he said. “I think it’s a net positive effect of the ruling. It’s not without controversy, but frankly, what we do is not without controversy.”
Debate over Jordan reignited in British Columbia this summer after a case against a man accused of sexually abusing a six-year-old was dismissed.
Prime Minister David Eby said at the time that a “perfect storm” of delays had been to blame and “not a single case should be dismissed like this”.
He said Jordan’s deadline was “very restrictive” and “has been devastating in other states.”
Of at least 409 Jordan challenges that have closed cases across Canada since early last year, 26 in B.C. involved charges ranging from fraud to theft, drug and weapons offenses and sexual assault. .
“Any case that is judicially stayed due to delay is a matter of concern,” British Columbia’s Attorney General said in a statement. I look forward to the decision being made on the merits of the case.”
“We take this issue seriously and have invested in process changes and increased resources to prevent trial stays,” it said in a statement.
In MacLean’s case, the B.C. Supreme Court ruled in August 2023 that his trial “went far beyond Jordan’s limits” without any delays due to defense negligence or disruptions to court operations due to COVID-19. Confirmed that it has been set.
“Had the Crown not failed in its disclosure obligations, this issue would likely have been settled within Jordan,” the judge wrote.
“A huge negative impact”
Stacey Purser, an Edmonton criminal defense lawyer, said Jordan didn’t create “the culture of urgency that I think the Supreme Court was trying to create.”
“Unfortunately, I don’t think much has really changed since Jordan. It’s just that once the estimated deadline passes, people seem to get very panicked to get things done,” she said.
Kayla Lee, a Vancouver defense attorney who specializes in impaired driving cases, said Jordan has had a “tremendous negative impact not only on my practice but on the practice of criminal lawyers in general.”
“The problem is that every time you go to court, no matter what the purpose of your appearance, there is always an argument about Jordan,” she said. “This issue comes up every time he appears in court, to the point where Jordan’s ceiling is effectively used as a weapon against the accused individuals.”
Given her busy schedule, finding a court date that works for both her and the prosecutor can be difficult, and disagreements can lead to arguments over who is to blame. Mr Lee said judges needed to conduct a “microscopic analysis” to determine the length and causes of trial delays.
“This makes everything a lot more complicated, a lot more contentious, and a lot more court time is being spent just dealing with these issues, so it’s really detrimental to the timely administration of justice.” ” she said.
Kate Alexander, a Canadian model and actress formerly living in Toronto and now living in Los Angeles, ended her life in an abusive relationship in July 2021 after claiming that her ex-partner brutally beat her with a wooden rolling pin. After nearly being killed, he founded an organization called End Violence Everywhere.
Several charges have been suspended due to delays, and Alexander said she felt “sick” after receiving assurances from prosecutors that the case would proceed.
She said the only outcome was a peace bond for her ex-boyfriend, who was initially charged with assault occasioning bodily harm, intimidation, obstruction and other offenses, and that she left the country out of fear for her safety.
“This was all they could offer me because they didn’t have time to prosecute my case,” she said.
Ms Alexander testified before the House of Commons Standing Committee on the Status of Women in July, recounting the stories of survivors, including Ms Hutton, whose experiences she described as “frighteningly similar” to her own.
In her testimony, Alexander told committee members that “the government is indifferent” to survivors and victims of intimate partner violence.
“We Canadians have Charter rights that are essentially a ‘get out of jail free’ card for criminals, but what about the rights of survivors? Why do we have Charter rights that are basically a ‘get out of jail free’ card for criminals? “Will their rights not be considered at all?” she testified.
Like Hutton, she is suing her ex-boyfriend because it is “the only form of legal justice left to me,” she told the committee.
Alexander also testified before the committee last week, telling commissioners that Jordan’s timeline should not apply in cases of sexual assault or intimate partner violence.
“There should be no time limits or residence permits for crimes against people,” she testified, later tearfully calling Jordan’s rules “disgusting” and “horrifying.”
Paisana said it was important to keep in mind Jordan’s “big picture”, the importance of timely trials, and the right of defendants to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
“As a result, this benefits society as a whole in a very dramatic way, as opposed to what may remain one or two individual cases in a given year in a given jurisdiction. ,” he said.
For Hutton, the collapse of the case against her ex-husband was devastating and continues to impact her life. After fleeing her old life in British Columbia, she is now installing multiple security systems in her new home.
In October 2023, Hutton filed a civil lawsuit against MacLean in the Supreme Court of British Columbia, alleging a “history of abuse” throughout their relationship, including assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and assault. The company sought damages for defamation.
She said getting permission to move from British Columbia with her children was “a little bit of justice.”
But she now lives in a state of extreme caution.
“I sleep with a golf club next to my bed,” she said.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Nov. 8, 2024.
