The victim claimed he was handled in a sexually inappropriate way by Toronto Police Officer James Forcillo, the officer recently convicted of the attempted murder of Sammy Yatim, and two accompanying officers while attending 14th Division to provide a statement to police about his being assaulted in his home in July 2010.
The victim himself was then charged for assault with a weapon. Once convicted of that assault in 2011 the victim says he decided his complaint of Officer Forcillo’s behaviour had been rendered null and void, so he tried alerting people to Judge Hogan’s alleged actions committed in Toronto’s Old City Hall courthouse in 2011.
Judge Hogan disregarded the victim’s rights as outlined in Section-7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. She was aware of the victim’s reduced mental capacity which was indicated by the victim himself, indicated by Toronto Police, and detailed in numerous judicial and medical reports provided prior to her setting a date for his trial.
He stated that he was unable to retain an attorney for both financial and cognitive reasons, and had been denied financial support by the Legal Aid Ontario. The relevant portion of Section-7 in the Canadian
Charter of Rights and Freedoms reads:
In R. v. Rowbotham, 1988 CanLII 147 (ON CA), the Ontario Court of Appeal found that Section-7 requires the appointment of counsel for an accused facing a serious criminal charge, who is not capable of representing himself and not financially able to retain counsel.
The victim contacted Barbara Butler of the Brain Injury Association of Canada (BIAC) asking them to advocate for him in 2012, 2013 and 2014.
The victim said “[she] kept saying BIAC couldn’t look at every complaint [TBI] Survivors make.” Barbara Butler was asked to speak to reports of her decision to repeatedly deny the victim assistance in any way, and in July 2016 she explained that it is not within the mandate of BIAC (now Brain Injury Canada) to advocate for survivors involved in such matters but rather it is the responsibility of the provincial Brain Injury Associations.
The Ontario Brain Injury Association (OBIA) in this case On April. 1, 2014, Advocacy Specialist Katie Muirhead of the Ontario Brain Injury Association stated "it is not that they/we refuse to provide advocacy, but that they do not have the capacity to do so." During a call in July 2016, she stated that she was not authorized to speak with members of the press.
Since the victims' conviction in 2011, the situation has not been remedied. Judge Hogan, who Canada pays over a quarter of a million dollars each year to administer justice and protect both vulnerable and regular members of Canadian society, was asked to explain the reason for her breach of the laws she’s sworn to uphold.
As of 6 p.m., July. 20, 2016, neither Judge Hogan nor her representative have responded with a requested statement speaking to these allegations.
Acquired/Traumatic Brain Injury (ABI/TBI) Survivors are known to confabulate and skew details of events when repeating them to others. However, it has been verified that the victim was indeed a TBI Survivor at the time of his conviction, it has been verified that Judge Hogan was indeed acutely aware of his medical status, and it has been verified that Judge Hogan did indeed at the very least allow the victim to represent himself in a court of law while facing what the courts deem serious charges.