Peter Andrews obstruction of justice trial

No ruling today, by the way. Lawyers can still submit case law in writing, check Day 1 translation transcript. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:23:54 PM

Hurley: "It's speculation that got is into this courtroom. I would hope the decision is not going to rest on speculation as well." #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:22:35 PM

Hurley rebuts: Crown's assertions are mostly speculation. Why not call Olscamp, others in that meeting, as witnesses to prove it? #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:20:25 PM

Crown wraps. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:18:44 PM

Judge: what would Andrews motive be in helping Robichaud? Crown: we don't have to prove motive. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:18:35 PM

Crown: why so important in this partic. case that charges should not be laid & brand new approach tried, if not that it was Robichaud. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:15:50 PM

Judge now questions Andrews' logic that fines weren't high enough to deter, noting dept can increase fines, seek maximum. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:13:32 PM

Crown says illogical that pulling licence made sense. Would close Robichaud operation -- not exactly stated goal of helping development. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:12:20 PM

Judge asks if Crown is attacking credibility of Andrews. "In a way, yes I am." Says Andrews' story doesn't add up. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:10:56 PM

Given Andrews re-checked decision with DM morning of Nov. 23, "isn't it more likely" decision made by Olscamp-Robichaud night before? #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:09:41 PM

Crown asks rhetorically if identity of Donat Robichaud's brother played a role in decision. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:08:00 PM

Crown: we have to ask: was decision really taken at that Nov 22 morning meeting? "What really happened" at that meeting? #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:06:59 PM

Crown says due to 6-month limit on charges, decision to try pulling licence amounts to no charge being laid. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:05:41 PM

Crown: dept's own enforcement policy allows charges "without warning" if dept warnings ignored, if public danger. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:03:43 PM

Once file ready, it's up to Crown to decide on charges, not senior bureaucrats. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 6:00:54 PM

Crown: it's undisputed that Donat Robichaud "mostly non-compliant" and that dept tried repeatedly & in vain to get him to comply. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:55:25 PM

Dept had "tried everything" and had threatened Robichaud repeatedly. He had no reason to believe yet more threats (on pulling licence). #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:54:05 PM

Crown: we don't dispute that Andrews took direction from Deputy Minister Dupuis. But Andrews took part in & agreed with decision. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:50:34 PM

Crown: Robichaud's equipment outside his lease area was "dangerous" to public and risked civil liability. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:49:15 PM

In case like Donat Robichaud, who was "mostly non-compliant," there was "only one option" -- to charge him. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:47:02 PM

Crown: we disagree that Germain was wrong to lay charge. "Mr. Germain was right" to see interference from higher-ups. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:45:31 PM

Crown prosecutor Mona Briere will now make her closing argument. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:34:42 PM

"Mr. Andrews' name was rarely mentioned throughout this entire trial." #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:22:48 PM

Hurley: throughout trial, we heard about Paul Robichaud, Donat Robichaud, DM Dupuis. "Who's on trial here?" #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:22:09 PM

Judge Dickson comment: "Every witness was credible." Everyone believed they were acting properly. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:19:28 PM

Hurley: we are here because of 2012 anonymous letter that made allegation. (Letter sent to Liberals & raised by them in Legislature.) #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:18:30 PM

Hurley: "There is no offence here, quite frankly." #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:17:04 PM

"Mr Andrews did it to get the information he needed to report to his deputy minister, and there's nothing wrong with that." -Hurley #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:16:13 PM

Dec 12 query by Sabine on if charges, laid by then, can be withdrawn: Andrews asked for that "because he was doing his job." #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:12:24 PM

In Hurley narrative, this whole thing goes back to Sabine wrongly seeing political motive. "Then all hell broke loose," judge observes. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:07:45 PM

Hurley: both Germain & Veniot took from Sabine's erroneous email that this was political, & that prompted decision to charge regardless. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:05:58 PM

Hurley reminds court Andrews didn't know about Sabine's inaccurate email until affair became public in April 2012. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:04:35 PM

Hurley: Sabine acknowledged he "surmised" when he suggested in email that decision on no charges came out of Olscamp-Robichaud meeting. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:03:28 PM

"Anyone who suggests anything that took place at that meeting is engaging in pure, unadulterated speculation and nothing more." -Hurley. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:02:07 PM

"Anyone who suggest anything that took place at that meeting is engaging in pure, unadulterated speculation and nothing more." - Hurley. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:01:27 PM

Hurley notes no evidence called, Olscamp and Robichaud not called as witnesses, as to what happened at their meeting. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 5:00:18 PM

Hurley: timeline also shows Nov 22 decision came prior to any meeting between Ministers Olscamp and Robichaud. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:58:35 PM

Hurley: registrar Lori O'Brien testified she looked into legality of pulling licence same afternoon. Consistent with Andrews evidence. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:56:57 PM

At that meeting it was raised, unexpectedly & not by Olscamp, to look at pulling licence instead of laying charge. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:55:14 PM

Judge Dickson notes Andrews evidence "uncontradicted" that key Nov 22 meeting held not on this case but to brief Olscamp on gen issues. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:52:45 PM

Hurley: "courtesy" notification of Robichaud by Olscamp was so that Robichaud would not be "taken off guard." #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:47:17 PM

Hurley: DM told Andrews Olscamp might want to tell Paul Robichaud "as a courtesy" that his brother to be charged. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:46:20 PM

Defence lawyer Hurley: Andrews "was directed by his superior ... as part of his duties" to hold off on charges til Olscamp briefed. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:45:11 PM

Judge Dickson asking Hurley questions during his closing about exact nature of Donat Robichaud violations. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:40:55 PM

Hurley: evidence shows dept studied system of fines without trial. Shows dept's preference for avoiding court. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:34:24 PM

Hurley: "I submit Mr Germain was wrong" to lay charge despite directive from head of enforcement Sabine. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:28:08 PM

Defence lawyer Hurley: 2011 same as 2008, when charges didn't proceed. Only difference: in 2011 officer laid charge regardless. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:27:05 PM

Hurley: Donat Robichaud was in and out of compliance for years, but was in compliance at some times. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:24:29 PM

Hurley: Andrews received direction and instructions from his deputy minister, and understood dept wanted to work with producers. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:21:59 PM

Defence: clear from policy document that dept sought to work with producers, with court charges "a last resort." No one disputed this. #NB

by Jacques Poitras via twitter 3/13/2014 4:19:59 PM

CBC News Canada

CBC News Navigation

Peter Andrews obstruction of justice trial

Latest Interactives