Defence lawyer at child porn trial says statements taken by officer shouldn't be admitted

The lawyer for a woman charged with child pornography offences argued Thursday that statements taken by a city police officer shouldn't be admitted as evidence at her trial.

Jessica Belisle maintained the Crown hadn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the statements and utterances her client made in 2019 were voluntary.

Citing frailties in Sgt. Jack Rice's testimony heard this week during a voir dire, she said the court must look at the totality of the circumstances surrounding the statements.

Prosecutor Karen Pritchard is seeking to have utterances the woman made to Rice when officers executed a search warrant at her home on Feb. 25, 2019, as well two videotaped interviews done at the police station, entered as evidence.

The defendant has pleaded not guilty to making child pornography, possession of child pornography for the purpose of distributing/selling it and telecomunicating with someone to commit a sexual offence with a person under the age of 18.

She is accused of providing photos of her young daughter to a man she met on an online dating site.

The offences are alleged to have occurred between Jan.1, 2015 and Dec. 31, 2017.

A publication ban prohibits reporting any information that may identify the complainant.

When the lawyers made their submissions about the statements, Pritchard said Rice had acted properly, making the woman aware of charges, cautioning her and explaining her rights to counsel, when he was at her residence.

"She was made aware that she's in jeopardy,"  the assistant Crown attorney told Superior Court Justice Annalisa Rasaiah.

"Of her own accord she began speaking, said she was ashamed of what she had done."

When she was taken to the station for an interview that day she was well aware that anything she said could be used against her - it's confirmed on the videotape, Pritchard said.

Belisle countered that Rice was aware that her client was a vulnerable person - she's not a serial criminal, has no record, is timid, quiet and not familiar with the justice system.

During the interview, he said he was interested in "Ed" the man she had communicated with, indicating his big concern was "the big fish on the other end of the line," the defence reminded the court. 

"In a sense you're a victim too," the officer told the woman, suggesting "Ed" has probably done this a 100 times.

Belisle called telling the woman she's a victim a "form of deceit," suggesting he didn't do any further investigation of "Ed."

Pritchard countered that Rice wasn't untruthful, he was alerting her that there were other aspects of the investigation he was interested in.

The officer needed more information than a first name to investigate "Ed,"  she said.

 "He never indicated she's not the target of investigation. He confirmed that to her at least twice - at her home with the search warrant and at the station."

Rice was building a rapport with her and wants her to feel comfortable, the Crown said.

"That is not police trickery or an inducement."

The lawyers will return to court May 11 to set a date for Rasaiah to give her decision on this application and a second one heard earlier dealing with the admissibility of a 2019 videotape interview the complainant had with a child protection worker.