A BC Supreme Court judge decided Monday, May 26 that one witness in the trial of a Hixon man will testify by video from another room in the Prince George courthouse.
Justice Palbinder Kaur Shergill made the ruling on the first day of a scheduled 10-day trial of Colton Bellerose. Bellerose pleaded not guilty to two charges of sexual assault and two charges of sexual interference of a person under age 16. The Crown accuses Bellerose of committing the offences between April 2019 and March 2022.
Identities of victims and witnesses are protected by a publication ban.
Defence lawyer Keith Jones said he agreed in principle to accommodate the witness, who is a minor, but opposed Crown prosecutor Sarah Grogan’s application. Jones wanted the witness to appear in the courtroom, behind a privacy screen instead of elsewhere in the courthouse.
“Call me old-fashioned, to be able to see the body language and so forth, it’s important in order to assess what the witness is saying, to be able to see her in the courtroom,” Jones said. “It's important for you as well, justice, to be able to observe her closely.”
Grogan said the quality of videoconferencing had improved such that remote testimony would not be an issue.
“So I believe here, the justice will be able to view the witness and their body language,” Grogan said.
Shergill granted the application, on the basis that the witness be alone while testifying, be without documents, except those provided by Crown and defence while under oath, and have no access to any device to send or receive messages.
Shergill, however, ruled against the Crown’s application for a second witness to appear remotely.
Grogan wanted the same treatment for an adult with a mental disability, because the witness would be “quite scared and overwhelmed about the experience of testifying in the courtroom.”
Shergill ruled that the witness will be in the courtroom, behind a privacy screen. Bellerose would not be present in the courtroom when the witness arrives or departs, “so that she does not have to see him.”
“That’s the appropriate accommodation. If there is something that changes, then, as I've said, Crown has leave to bring that application back on again,” the judge said.
