Whitehorse man is granted a new trial

A new trial has been ordered for a 71-year-old Whitehorse man convicted of common assault, on the grounds that the trial judge erred by not ordering that the accused be represented by counsel.

A new trial has been ordered for a 71-year-old Whitehorse man convicted of common assault, on the grounds that the trial judge erred by not ordering that the accused be represented by counsel.

Tim Waranuk was convicted of assault in October 2006, after having represented himself during the trial.

But Waranuk was found not criminally responsible due to a mental disorder and did not receive a sentence.

Waranuk appealed his conviction on four grounds, each of which Yukon Supreme Court Justice Leigh Gower dismissed.

But Gower allowed a new trial on a ground of appeal presented by Michael Reynolds, who appeared as an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, during the appeal process.

An amicus curiae is a lawyer who can be appointed to assist a self-represented litigant in court. Unlike legal counsel, the amicus merely assists the litigant and does not represent him or her.

Reynolds argued that the trial judge had a duty “to assist a self-represented litigant to ensure procedural fairness,“ according to the court document.

Reynolds also argued that “a number of legal issues and concepts were beyond Mr. Waranuk’s knowledge or experience,“ including the trial process, proper cross-examination and questioning techniques, the difference between giving evidence and making submissions, and what constitutes relevant evidence.

“I conclude that the trial judge erred in law by not ordering that Mr. Waranuk be represented by counsel upon determining that he had reasonable grounds ... to believe that he might be unfit to stand trial,“ Gower wrote in the decision.

“In my view, had Waranuk been represented by counsel ... this verdict might have been different,“ the document continues.

Waranuk, who maintains that he does not suffer from any mental disorder, argued that the trial judge’s decision was “inappropriate and unjustified,“ that the trial was unfair and did not allow him to conduct full cross-examinations of the witnesses, that he did not receive complete and timely disclosure of the evidence intended to be led in the trial, and that he was prevented from calling to evidence to contradict the evidence of Dr. Armando Heredia, a psychiatrist who testified at the trial.

Gower noted in the decision that Waranuk failed to provide any submissions or evidence to support three of the four arguments.

Moreover, given that court records did not support Waranuk’s allegations, wrote Gower, each of these arguments was dismissed.

Although Waranuk pursued the second ground of appeal at the appeal hearing, Gower found that the trial judge “gave significant latitude to Mr. Waranuk in his cross-examination of Dr. Heredia.“ This ground of appeal then also failed.

The assault charge against Waranuk stemmed from an incident that occurred in December 2006, when Waranuk was charged with assaulting two female assistants at Yukon MP Larry Bagnell’s offices on Second Avenue.