Appeal court quashes order for new trial of man acquitted of harassing Sue Montgomery

The Quebec Court of Appeal has overturned an order to hold a new trial for a man found not guilty of criminally harassing former Côte-des-Neiges–Notre-Dame-de-Grâce mayor Sue Montgomery.

The decision, dated Sept. 19, was signed by judges Geneviève Marcotte, Guy Cournoyer and Peter Kalichman.

The case involves Robert Michael Edgar.

In 2018, he was charged with three counts of criminal harassment.

Article content

In 2019, Quebec Court Judge Flavia K. Longo found Edgar not guilty. Longo said while Edgar did harass Montgomery, his actions were not criminal because they did not make her fear for her safety.

In 2021, the Quebec Superior Court ordered a new trial, ruling the lower court decision that cleared him was based on “myths and stereotypes.”

Superior Court Justice Pierre Labrie found Longo had erred in concluding Edgar’s harassment did not cause Montgomery to be afraid.

Longo’s ruling was based on a March 2018 video shown during the trial. In it, Montgomery called the police after encountering Edgar protesting outside the Unitarian Church.

While waiting for police to arrive, Montgomery kicked Edgar’s protest signs and moved them into the street.

Longo ruled Montgomery’s “face and body language did not exhibit any signs of fright” and her actions showed she was trying to provoke the accused.

Labrie found the lower-court ruling was flawed because it “relied on how a victim of harassment should react under fear.”

“With respect, the trial judge’s inference on the lack of fear is based on myths and stereotypes and, therefore, she erred in law,” he said.

In their eight-page judgment, the Court of Appeal judges found Labrie erred by “mischaracterizing the trial judge’s reasonable doubt as having been based on myths and stereotypes.”

The judges wrote: “The trial judge committed no palpable and overriding error in concluding that (Montgomery’s) testimony stood in stark contrast to her actions on March 18, 2018, when she deliberately approached the appellant, remained close to him for eight minutes and repeatedly kicked his signs into the street.”

Recommended from Editorial