Haaima sexual-assault trial lags behind schedule, verdict a year away | #childpredator | #kidsaftey | #childsaftey

Article content

So much for the idea that justice delayed is justice denied.

Article content

What lawyers on both sides are calling a “mega trial” is looming to run even longer than expected with developments in Superior Court in Kingston on Wednesday.

The schedule for the trial of Michael Haaima was revised only last week. With Haaima pleading not guilty to 96 of 98 charges, including more than 30 charges of sexual assault, and with the Crown expecting to call 28 complainants to the witness box to testify about incidents from 2007 to 2022, lawyers on both sides knew going in that they were in for a long haul. The length of the trial was chief of the factors in opting for a bench trial without a jury.

With a week off in July, two weeks off in August and with a few breaks in the fall and for the holidays, the schedule agreed upon called for the Crown to wrap up its case by the end of the calendar year and Haaima’s defence to begin March 2, 2026. According to this timeline, and if further delays can be avoided, a verdict would be handed down by Justice Robyn Ryan Bell in the late spring of 2026, four years after the arrest of the tech worker.

Article content

Article content

This week, however, that schedule looked hopelessly optimistic. The proceedings have already fallen behind.

The Crown called the sixth of the 28 complainants to the witness box on Monday. The Kingston woman whose identity is protected by a publication ban testified about meeting Haaima in 2008 after attending an alternative-learning centre where he sold marijuana to students.

The woman’s testimony was tied to two charges against Haaima, one for sexual assault, the other for assault on a person under the age of 16.

The witness told the court she had gone to Haaima’s apartment to look at his graphic art, but she was physically over-powered by him and sexually assaulted. She also testified about a Facebook message that mentioned “Mike.”

Article content

When the witness was excused for the day before cross-examination could commence. Justice Ryan Bell instructed the witness to have no discussion of the case with anyone other than a court-appointed lawyer, who would advise her about the defence’s request for access to her social media.

That evening, however, the witness phoned Detective Bev Mackey of the OPP anti-human-trafficking unit. Mackey has been sitting on the Crown’s side of the courtroom throughout proceedings since the trial began last month.

The witness asked about the court schedule but followed up with a question about her testimony with regard to the Facebook exchange.

The detective reported the phone call to the court, but Haaima’s lawyer Natasha Calvinho cried foul.

Article content

“The officer (Mackey) obviously doesn’t know the rules of engagement,” Calvinho said. “She should not be sitting in this trial any longer. I respectfully want her out of the room. This was gross negligence or a complete disregard for a court order.”

More to the point, Calvinho made a case that the charges related to the witness should be stayed.

“This will call into question every contact with the witness (who testified on Monday),” Calvinho said.

Calvinho made it clear that she was not impugning the integrity of the Crown. “I’m not suggesting my friends did anything wrong,” defence counsel said. She was, however, admittedly “outraged” by Mackey’s actions and what she described as a “flippant” response when confronted about it outside the courtroom.

Article content

In court on Wednesday morning, Calvinho requested a recess until Tuesday, “time to research” questioning for the witness about her call to Mackey and possibly for follow-up with the detective after that. Effectively, with the cancellation of testimony scheduled for that day, Thursday and Monday, Calvinho’s request would have added three full days to the trial schedule which was set only last week.

On top of that, Calvinho told Justice Ryan Bell that she was withdrawing the defence’s agreement to waive its concession of the complainants’ identification of the accused, which had been a concession to expedite the trial based on good faith.

Assistant Crown Megan Williams made a case for proceeding on Wednesday and attempting to stick to the schedule in place.

Article content

Williams described the witness’ call to the detective as “unfortunate but not outrageous.”

“They have no bearing on the case,” Williams said of the Facebook exchange. “There were no messages between (Haaima and the complainant) and they have no connection to the date (of the alleged assaults).”

Madame Justice Ryan Bell split the difference between the defence’s and Crown’s requests and adjourned the trial until Monday morning, which represented the loss of two days.

Add to that the day lost last week when Calvinho had a case of laryngitis, and it has effectively been two steps forward with three steps back over the tortuous course of proceedings.

Article content