OTTAWA – Mike Duffy’s lawyer has asked for six more weeks of trial – and suggested it take place smack dab in the middle of the federal election campaign.
Donald Bayne told the judge he expects he’ll need an extra three weeks to complete his case on behalf of the suspended former Conservative senator – and asked for another month and a half to be safe.
Bayne suggested this could happen anytime in the fall between September to December.
A federal election is scheduled to take place on Oct. 19.
When asked after court if Bayne’s strategy was to extend the trial into the election, he said: “Absolutely not, nothing to do with that. This is a trial.”
He said he needed the extension “for the reason you need it in any trial, we may not have enough time.”
Ontario Court judge Charles Vaillancourt, who has already hinted the trial will go long, said it’s up to the lawyers and the court’s scheduler to come up with a suitable time.
Bayne’s request came at the end of a sharp-tongued cross-examination of a key Senate witness, whom Bayne suggested was an “advocate” for the Crown.
Bayne peppered former top Senate finance official Nicole Proulx with questions about four meetings she attended with the Crown and the RCMP, one during Duffy’s trial, even after she refused to meet with the defence team because she said she was too busy.
“You were helping the prosecution,” Bayne told Proulx.
“You’re not an advocate, you’re a witness.”
Proulx said after speaking with her lawyer she decided not to meet with Bayne, and told the court she provided the defence with all the necessary documents.
She then requested a chance to read her agenda to look up the meetings she attended, and court broke early for the weekend.
“Your honour, I’m very uncomfortable with this,” she told the judge.
Earlier Friday upon examination by the Crown, Proulx ran over the myriad of Senate rules and policies which she said prohibited senators from claiming expenses for purely partisan activities that were not Parliamentary, medical appointments for travel to Ottawa, and for paid work such as speeches.
But Bayne suggested these rules were not laid out before an official travel policy in 2012.
Vaillancourt agreed that whether there were any rules at all is part of the debate.
‘What rules?’
Vaillancourt told the court that the question of clear rules will be subject to “close scrutiny” at the end of the day.
“What rules? You know, that’s something that I’m interested in hearing about,” Vaillancourt said.
Crown prosecutor Jason Neubauer was asking Proulx about the new travel expenses policy set out in 2012, and what existed in broad strokes in the years before that.
READ MORE: Mike Duffy trial: 8 allegedly fraudulent trips that cost almost $38,000
Duffy’s 31 fraud and breach of trust charges relate primarily to his years as a senator between 2009 and 2012.
“Of course that’s the whole point, whether there were any rules at all,” Vaillancourt told Neubauer.
“At the end of the day I hope you have something more substantial than what appears on the platter.”
Proulx was testifying Friday about the rules for expense claims and what senators were allowed to claim on the Senate’s dime.
“It’s everywhere,” she said about the rules.
She said prior to 2012, there was no explicit policy for what senators were allowed to claim, but the administrative rules and a Senate guidebook laid out the fact that senators weren’t allowed to bill for personal appointments or partisan matters that were outside of Parliamentary work.
READ MORE: Duffy charged taxpayers more than $12,000 for personal trips to funerals, documents allege
Bayne has said this is a matter of her opinion, and that Proulx is an “interested witness.”
“I’ve already indicated my position on this type of evidence, I’m allowing it, but it’s subject to very close scrutiny at the end of the day,” Vaillancourt told the court.
Neubauer then rose to make sure the judge hadn’t yet made up his mind.
“First of all, It’s our hope that your honour hasn’t made any findings of fact,” he said.
“I usually wait until the end of the day to decide the facts,” Vaillacourt replied.
The Crown said that he was trying to develop for the court the Senate rules as they existed.
“That’s good, and like I say at the end of the day we’ll see how successful you have been,” the judge replied.
– with files from Global News’ Bryan Mullan
Comments