The Crown alleged that after fleeing the scene, Idris attempted to sell the motorcycle. He\u2019s charged with dangerous driving causing bodily harm, leaving the scene of an accident and obstruction of justice.<\/p>\n
Defence lawyer Elham Ellen Jamshidi, who handled the trial in January, called Hasanbasic to the stand. While the Crown argued that Idris deliberately struck the sergeant, Hasanbasic testified that it looked like the bike was going to pull over and that while it made contact with the officer, it was not a head-on collision.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Young \u201cseemed like he was fine,\u201d Hasanbasic testified in January. \u201cI know that he completed his shift, which means he wasn\u2019t injured seriously enough.\u201d<\/p>\n
After his testimony was over, Hasanbasic wrote that Goldenberg confronted him by \u201ctelling me that is the most embarrassing, pathetic testimony she has heard in 37 years.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cI respond with, \u2018I\u2019m not sure what you want me to do, I was just telling the truth.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
An excerpt from Hasanbasic\u2019s handwritten notes.<\/p>\n
Ontario Court of Justice exhibit<\/p>\n
He wrote that Goldenberg said her husband is a cop, and twice told him, \u201cwe protect our own,\u201d including after he asked if he was supposed to lie. He then returned to a meeting room, telling Jamshidi and another officer, \u201cThe Crown just tore me a new one for being honest.\u201d<\/p>\n
Det. Const. Eloi Silva, the officer in charge of Idris\u2019s case, wrote in a brief \u201cobservational note\u201d that he saw Goldenberg confront Hasanbasic, but Silva didn\u2019t note Goldenberg saying, \u201cwe protect our own,\u201d or that Hasanbasic asked if he was supposed to lie.<\/p>\n
\u201cShe was speaking quickly and appeared visibly irritated,\u201d Silva wrote.<\/p>\n
Meanwhile, Idris was sitting around the corner \u2014 \u201cI was just trying to eavesdrop on the conversation, to be honest with you,\u201d he testified.<\/p>\n
He wrote down what he overheard and later swore an affidavit detailing his recollection. He said he heard Goldenberg say, \u201cWhere is this cop?\u201d after emerging from the courtroom. When Goldenberg confronted Hasanbasic, Idris said in his affidavit he heard her raise her voice and say, \u201cI can\u2019t believe you f\u2014-ing testified against a sergeant of 30 years.\u201d<\/p>\n
He then overheard her say: \u201cYou\u2019re a young copper and you have many years ahead of you. If you continue this way, you won\u2019t have a lengthy or easy career.\u201d<\/p>\n
Idris said he heard the officer say, \u201cI\u2019m sorry, I was called to tell the truth. I was just saying what I had seen that day. I was not taking sides,\u201d and that Goldenberg responded: \u201cIt\u2019s disgusting what you did today. I\u2019ve never witnessed something like this.\u201d<\/p>\n
Hasanbasic takes the stand<\/p>\n
Hasanbasic took the stand again this week during the hearing for the stay application. He said he was \u201ctaken aback\u201d by the encounter with Goldenberg, and especially because it was in public.<\/p>\n
\u201cI\u2019d never been spoken to before by a Crown like that,\u201d he said, describing the encounter as unprofessional.<\/p>\n
While he wrote in his notes that Goldenberg told him, \u201cwe protect our own,\u201d he testified that it may not have been those exact words, but rather \u201calong those lines.\u201d<\/p>\n
Defence lawyer Peter Thorning, who is representing Idris for the stay application, pressed the officer on what he believed Goldenberg was trying to convey. \u201cThat maybe my testimony didn\u2019t go the way she wanted it to go,\u201d Hasanbasic replied.<\/p>\n
Thorning continued: \u201cIn your mind, was the Crown suggesting you should not tell the truth?\u201d<\/p>\n
That was possible, the officer responded, \u201cbecause that\u2019s what it felt like.\u201d<\/p>\n
He agreed under cross-examination by Crown attorney Simon Heeney, the head prosecutor for downtown Toronto, that he made several mistakes when testifying about the motorcycle incident, then also agreed it would be fair for a lawyer to be disappointed about that.<\/p>\n
Ultimately, Heeney put to Hasanbasic that he \u201cexaggerated\u201d what Goldenberg said to him because, by his own account, he was surprised and embarrassed to be \u201cchastised\u201d in a public hallway.<\/p>\n
\u201cMaybe to make yourself look better,\u201d Heeney suggested to Hasanbasic.<\/p>\n
The officer disagreed, saying if someone has a problem with his testimony, there\u2019s a process in place that involves notifying his superior, \u201cand then they would speak to me and it would be handled in an in-house sort of way.\u201d<\/p>\n
Goldenberg\u2019s version<\/p>\n
When Goldenberg took the stand, it was the second time this month that the longtime Crown attorney found herself in the witness box \u2014 she also testified just last week as the victim<\/a> in an antisemitic threat trial, in which the accused woman was convicted.<\/p>\n She said she didn\u2019t call any of the police eyewitnesses to testify because she felt she already had the best evidence to prove the case \u2014 Young\u2019s body-worn camera footage of the incident. But she did promptly make arrangements for Hasanbasic to be at court in January after Jamshidi, the defence lawyer, requested that he be there.<\/p>\n Goldenberg denied using words like embarrassing, pathetic or disgusting in her encounter with Hasanbasic. And she highlighted an obvious inaccuracy in his notes: she has not been a Crown attorney for 37 years, pointing out she would have been a teenager 37 years ago.<\/p>\n She testified she spoke with Hasanbasic because she was disappointed that he would testify \u201cin such an inaccurate fashion.\u201d She emphasized that officer notes \u201care very important,\u201d as they form part of the Crown\u2019s decision as to whether to pursue criminal charges.<\/p>\n \u201cI\u2019ve been doing this job for 22 years, and I have never, ever, seen an officer testify like that,\u201d she testified. \u201cHe was like butter. He melted under pressure. He would have said anything.\u201d<\/p>\n In an affidavit, Goldenberg wrote that she approached Hasanbasic after his testimony by saying something like, \u201cWhat was that? That was disappointing,\u201d and Hasanbasic responded with, \u201cThat was uncomfortable,\u201d in a tone Goldenberg perceived as \u201cflippant\u201d; she admits that irritated her.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt just didn\u2019t seem he cared,\u201d Goldenberg testified.<\/p>\n She said she outlined for him the inconsistencies in his testimony, including that he had said in his statement at the scene that the motorcyclist \u201crode right into the sergeant.\u201d In his testimony, he said it was more of a \u201cside swipe\u201d or a \u201cgraze.\u201d<\/p>\n While Hasanbasic testified that Young wasn\u2019t seriously injured, since he finished his shift, Goldenberg said she told him in the hallway that\u2019s because Young is a \u201c38-year copper and that\u2019s what they do,\u201d going on to say that her husband is a \u201c37-year copper\u201d and would have also completed his shift.<\/p>\n \u201cI find recently that younger officers, or even more senior officers, they get a cut to their finger and they take off for months,\u201d she testified. \u201cIt\u2019s just this mindset now of some officers who take advantage of the system, and Sgt. Young was clearly not one of them.\u201d<\/p>\n Why the confrontation is at the centre of a court hearing<\/p>\n Goldenberg\u2019s actions are \u201cblatantly inconsistent with conduct expected of a Crown, or any lawyer, and no remedy other than a stay of proceedings is appropriate,\u201d wrote defence lawyers Thorning and Alexa Banister-Thompson in the stay application.<\/p>\n \u201cWhen asked a direct question by the officer about whether he should have not told the truth under oath, the Crown advised him that it would have been better had he provided false evidence in support of a fellow officer and the Crown theory.\u201d<\/p>\n The defence arguments are based on a \u201cfundamentally flawed account of the facts,\u201d says a response filed by Crown attorneys Heeney and David Quayat.<\/p>\n They point out that Goldenberg spoke to Hasanbasic after he had already finished his testimony, and argue that the claim that she suggested he should have lied is \u201ccompletely unsupported\u201d by the evidence.\u00a0<\/p>\n