Bulletin: Ivan Henry: British Columbia: Canadian Press reports: "Vancouver settlement means B.C. off the hook for police misconduct: Crown."..."The Crown also argued that Henry’s decision to forego legal counsel means he would not have known what to do with the additional evidence even if it had been disclosed to him. But Henry’s lawyer John Laxton skewered that assertion. “At its lowest level this amounts to saying: ”It doesn’t matter that we refused to disclose information, he’s too dumb and stupid to have been able to do anything about it,“ Laxton said. “This is a very sad comment on our judicial system.”

'British Columbia prosecutors should not be liable for mistakes made by Vancouver police even if they were aware that officer misconduct put a wrongfully convicted man behind bars for 27 years, a Crown lawyer says. John Hunter says Ivan Henry isn’t entitled to damages from the province for police errors because Henry has already settled with the City of Vancouver and, by extension, the police department. “If we (the province) are being criticized for not disclosing something that the police did or didn’t do, we’re being criticized in respect of acts attributable to police, and the plaintiff has waived damages with respect to acts attributable to police,” Hunter told B.C. Supreme Court on Thursday. “But whatever the police did or didn’t do the Crown knew about it,” countered Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson. “The fact that the Crown may or may not have known about it is beside the point, because of the waiver,” Hunter replied. Henry, 69, is suing the provincial government for up to $43 million in compensation after he was locked up for nearly three decades on 10 sexual assault convictions before being acquitted in 2010. His acquittal focused on potentially useful evidence Crown or police withheld, including sperm samples that didn’t match Henry’s blood type, contradictory victim statements and a compromising letter sent from a victim to an investigating officer. Hunter said in closing arguments that awarding millions of dollars to a wrongfully imprisoned man who made the ill-informed decision to represent himself in court would send the wrong message.

“It should not be the case that if you decide to self-represent and things go badly that you’re going to get a chance years later to have an autopsy of the whole case ... and at the end of the day there could be a big payday for you.” Henry should bear some responsibility for his conviction after repeatedly refusing legal counsel during his 1982 sexual-assault trial, Hunter said....... The Crown also argued that Henry’s decision to forego legal counsel means he would not have known what to do with the additional evidence even if it had been disclosed to him. But Henry’s lawyer John Laxton skewered that assertion. “At its lowest level this amounts to saying: ”It doesn’t matter that we refused to disclose information, he’s too dumb and stupid to have been able to do anything about it,“ Laxton said. “This is a very sad comment on our judicial system.”"

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/ivan-henry-wrongful-imprisonment-case-about-risks-of-self-representation-crown/article27807615/