BC judge’s constant interruptions see sex assault conviction quashed, new trial ordered

A BC court has ruled that a judge’s constant interruptions during a sexual assault case caused the trial to be unfair, leaving the victim to testify all over again.

According to a Nov. 7 BC Supreme Court ruling, BC Provincial Court judge Gregory Rideout repeatedly intervened throughout the seven-day trial, interrupting both Crown and defence lawyers.

“The sheer magnitude of the interventions and the nature of the questions led the trial judge to slowly but surely elicit significant evidence. The evidence he elicited was then used by him explicitly and implicitly to convict the (accused), thus creating the impression that the trial judge was not neutral,” BC Supreme Court Justice John Walker said in the decision.

The case involves 66-year-old Chih Hwa Leo Chow the owner of the Vancouver bar, The Brickhouse, who was sentenced to one year in jail for sexually assaulting a friend’s daughter late at night in the bar three years ago.

However, Chow appealed, arguing he didn’t get a fair trial because of Judge Rideout’s consistent interruptions.

The decision says Judge Rideout interrupted both the Crown and the defence and his questioning went further than just clarifying evidence or making witnesses feel at ease.

Chow’s lawyer argues the questions posed by the judge were leading questions which suggested an answer.

The decision says that at one point, Judge Rideout largely took over the questioning of the witness for a period of time, not allowing the Crown to ask questions despite her attempt to do so.

“Crown counsel was able to question the witness briefly, but the trial judge again took over the questioning and elicited details that Crown counsel had not sought to elicit,” the decision reads.

At another point, Judge Rideout conducted his own cross-examination of Chow and shut the defence lawyer down when they attempted to object.

Over the years, Judge Rideout has made numerous contentious decisions. 

Earlier this year, he found a Vancouver man not guilty of slashing a stranger’s face, even though he said the accused was “more likely than not” to be the assailant. A decade ago, he acquitted a Vancouver man of dangerous driving causing death, although the accused was driving twice the speed limit. Following the Stanley Cup riot in 2011, in a highly unusual move, Judge Rideout amended a sentencing days after ordering a rioter to do 150 hours of community service. He said he was “mindful” of the strain on BC Corrections staff and reduced the sentence to 50 hours.

In the current case, the judge’s interruptions will now see a re-trial, which will put the victim back in the courtroom to testify again.

Judge Rideout’s interventions led the defence to argue that the questions were sophisticated and boxed the accused in.

The judge then used some of that evidence to convict Chow of the sexual assault.

The defence argues that Judge Rideout’s interventions started with routine questioning, but then evolved to “invasive cross-examination” of all witnesses and the accused.

The decision says judges are allowed to ask questions of witnesses to clear up ambiguities and to clarify matters that have been left vague. Judges can also ask questions that should have been asked by lawyers on relevant matters.

“However, there are definite limits on this right,” Justice Walker says in the decision. “The discretion to ask questions must be exercised judicially, trial judges must exercise cautious restraint and confine themselves to their own responsibilities.”

Justice Walker found Judge Rideout had crossed that line.

The Justice didn’t find that Judge Rideout was biased, but that he’d used evidence garnered by him to then convict Chow, which amounted to an unfair trial.

Ultimately, the 66-year-old bar owner had his conviction quashed, and the matter will start ticking through the court system again in preparation for a new trial.