- 注册
- 2002-10-07
- 消息
- 402,597
- 荣誉分数
- 76
- 声望点数
- 228
The trial of The Royal Ottawa Hospital on Occupational Health and Safety Act charges will go ahead after the court rejected the hospital’s lawyers’ bid for a stay of proceedings.
Justice of the Peace John Doran also rejected the hospital’s request for a publication ban, ruling that the “court of public opinion” was also an important element in the trial.
Lawyers for the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group had asked for the stay, arguing that future testimony from witnesses could be tainted by the Citizen’s coverage of the trial. A stay of proceedings would have stopped the trial indefinitely, effectively ending the prosecution.
If the stay wasn’t granted, the hospital had asked for a full or partial publication ban on the trial.
In his ruling Wednesday morning, Doran said the defence had failed to prove the hospital’s right to a fair trial had been compromised and noted that witnesses statements obtained before the trial served as a “baseline” of evidence.
In rejecting the publication ban, Doran said many of the witnesses worked together and that they would have talked about the incident “was a part of everyday life.”
The hospital was charged with safety violation after a violent July 2012 “Code White” incident in which three hospital staff members were injured by an out-of-control patient.
The Citizen opposed any publication ban, while lawyers for the Ontario Ministry of Labour opposed a stay, which prosecutor Grainne McGrath argued was “completely unprecedented” and a “drastic remedy of last resort.”
“There was nothing inappropriate about the media coverage and in fact there is a constitutional right of the media to report on these matters,” McGrath argued in December.
In arguing against a publication ban, Citizen lawyer Anastasia Semenova said the concept of an open court is “crucial” to a democratic society. Interest in The Royal trial is high, particularly for health care workers, and represents “a serious breakdown in workplace safety.”
“This could potentially affect tens of thousands of health care workers in the province,” she said.
The hospital is charged with three violations of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act: failing to provide proper training to protect workers’ health and safety; failing to take proper precautions to protect workers; and failing to develop proper measures for workers to summon help in an emergency.
The stay motion comes partway through the trial in which several nurses and health care staff have testified about a frenzied melee in the hospital’s recovery ward on July 5, 2012. One nurse was choked to unconsciousness, another knocked out when she was thrown against a steel door frame and a third worker was struck as she tried to help subdue the patient, referred to in court only as “Patient X.”
The Royal Ottawa’s lawyer argued that, although the assault was serious, it was “peripheral” to the charges, which concern internal policies and procedures at the hospital. He said that Citizen stories on Nov. 26 and 27 were widely read by staff, some of whom may be called to testify.
bcrawford@ottawacitizen.com
twitter.com/getBAC
查看原文...
Justice of the Peace John Doran also rejected the hospital’s request for a publication ban, ruling that the “court of public opinion” was also an important element in the trial.
Lawyers for the Royal Ottawa Health Care Group had asked for the stay, arguing that future testimony from witnesses could be tainted by the Citizen’s coverage of the trial. A stay of proceedings would have stopped the trial indefinitely, effectively ending the prosecution.
If the stay wasn’t granted, the hospital had asked for a full or partial publication ban on the trial.
In his ruling Wednesday morning, Doran said the defence had failed to prove the hospital’s right to a fair trial had been compromised and noted that witnesses statements obtained before the trial served as a “baseline” of evidence.
In rejecting the publication ban, Doran said many of the witnesses worked together and that they would have talked about the incident “was a part of everyday life.”
The hospital was charged with safety violation after a violent July 2012 “Code White” incident in which three hospital staff members were injured by an out-of-control patient.
The Citizen opposed any publication ban, while lawyers for the Ontario Ministry of Labour opposed a stay, which prosecutor Grainne McGrath argued was “completely unprecedented” and a “drastic remedy of last resort.”
“There was nothing inappropriate about the media coverage and in fact there is a constitutional right of the media to report on these matters,” McGrath argued in December.
In arguing against a publication ban, Citizen lawyer Anastasia Semenova said the concept of an open court is “crucial” to a democratic society. Interest in The Royal trial is high, particularly for health care workers, and represents “a serious breakdown in workplace safety.”
“This could potentially affect tens of thousands of health care workers in the province,” she said.
The hospital is charged with three violations of the Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act: failing to provide proper training to protect workers’ health and safety; failing to take proper precautions to protect workers; and failing to develop proper measures for workers to summon help in an emergency.
The stay motion comes partway through the trial in which several nurses and health care staff have testified about a frenzied melee in the hospital’s recovery ward on July 5, 2012. One nurse was choked to unconsciousness, another knocked out when she was thrown against a steel door frame and a third worker was struck as she tried to help subdue the patient, referred to in court only as “Patient X.”
The Royal Ottawa’s lawyer argued that, although the assault was serious, it was “peripheral” to the charges, which concern internal policies and procedures at the hospital. He said that Citizen stories on Nov. 26 and 27 were widely read by staff, some of whom may be called to testify.
bcrawford@ottawacitizen.com
twitter.com/getBAC
查看原文...
