Delays hamper sentencing in Kelowna sexual assault trial

Warning: This story deals with sexual violence which may be triggering for some readers.

Another sentencing delay left a sexual assault victim crying in Kelowna Supreme Court on May 27.

The sentencing, which would have marked the end of a four-year legal battle for the assault survivor, was delayed because the victim impact statement she prepared was too long.

“I am still in shock at how heartbreakingly horrible this was,” said one person who was in court and witnessed the proceedings, in a statement to Black Press Media. For fear of reprisals, the person asked to remain anonymous.

The survivor will be referred to as Jane Doe because her name cannot be released due to a court-ordered publication ban. Doe previously said she felt like she had been living in a nightmare for four years since the assault took place on Christmas Eve 2020.

Two years after the assault, on November 5, 2022, Joshua Hawco was convicted of sexual assault by unanimous decision of a 12-person jury.

READ MORE: Jury finds Kelowna man guilty of sexual assault

Before the proceedings began, Hawco was given the choice of a trial by jury and judge or a trial by judge alone, as is the case for anyone accused of a serious crime. Hawco elected to proceed to a trial by judge and jury.

During the trial, Doe testified that she was sleeping in her bed when she was awakened by Hawco as he sexually assaulted her in the early morning. He was unknown to her and had been invited to the residence by her roommate for a first date. After her roommate fell asleep, Hawco entered Doe's room while she was sleeping and assaulted her in her bed.

A few months after the jury's verdict, but before sentencing, Hawco filed a motion for a mistrial on the “sexual assault conviction” charge, which led to delays in sentencing.

READ MORE: Kelowna woman advocates for sexual assault survivors, hopes for justice

Hawco claims its Charter rights were violated because part of Doe's statement was redacted in the submissions it received. After the guilty verdict, he requested and was granted access to the redacted portions of the statement.

Based on publicly available court documents, it is unclear exactly what information was redacted, but Hawco argues that this information would have been useful to know before trial and could have aided his defense.

The Crown argued the onus is on the defense to seek disclosure and said Hawco's lawyer was given the time and opportunity to request unredacted copies of the statements before the trial began. .

On March 28, 2024, Judge Weatherill denied Hawco's request, stating: “Having reviewed the redacted portions, and while it may be relevant to the defense, overall I am not satisfied that they have reached the level of materiality (sic) which would justify the mistrial”, and dismissed the case.

On the day scheduled for sentencing, Doe prepared to read her victim impact statement in court.

Before the statement was read, Hawco's lawyer argued that because it did not meet the standards set out in the Criminal Code of Canada, the statement should not be read in court.

Judge Weatherill conceded and ruled that the statement should be amended and a new date set for sentencing.

The court will reconvene on June 3 to set a sentencing date.