唐煒臻的下一步行動：到加拿大司法部去要求重審

唐炜臻

唐煒臻的下一步行動：到加拿大司法部去要求重審
the Next Big Move: Application for Criminal Conviction ReviewWeizhen Tang ask for a new trial based on fresh evidence

on the following grounds:
(i)         theApplicants’ constitutional rights to a fair trial and to make full answer anddefence have been denied as a result of the denial by the courts below to grantthe applicant his application for provision of state funded counsel given thecomplexity of the case and his lack of legal knowledge and inability tocross-examine witnesses and put his defence effectively.
(ii)        thelearned Justices erred in law in stating that the applicant decided not tochallenge the crown’s expert witness when in fact he had done so at thepreliminary hearing but his incompetence and ineffectiveness made it impossiblefor him to prevent the expert from being qualified and at trial, he was advisedthat Amicus would be more effective but Amicus was also ineffective andincompetent in addition to ignoring the instruction of the applicant tochallenge the qualifications of the expert as the expert felt that the expertwas a mere account and not a forensic expert, let alone qualified to give anopinion on financial investments.
(iii)       thelearned Justices  erred in law in theirreasoning that the evidence and opinion of the expert was harmless or benign,it was the testimony of the unchallenged expert that swayed the jury.
(iv)       thelearned Justices did not have before them the proposed fresh evidence about theincompetence and ineffectiveness of Amicus which rendered the trial unfair.
(v)        thecircumstances of the case are such that the lack of representation of theapplicant and further his being assisted by ineffective and incompetent Amicus,who did not advice whatsoever about the numerous potential motions that wereopen to the applicant for the effective defence of the charges rendered the trialunfair and runs contrary to the tenents of the rule of law in Canada.
http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/cj-jp/ccr-rc/index.html

I will  apply for a criminal conviction review by the Minister ofJustice if I  believe there has been a miscarriage of justice or awrongful conviction and you meet the criteria set out in the Criminal Code.The Minister of Justice has the authority to order a new trial or torefer the matter to the Court of Appeal in the appropriate province orterritory.
Lawyers in the Criminal Conviction Review Group (CCRG) reviewand investigate each application and make recommendations to theMinister.

Regulations Respecting Applications for Ministerial Review — Miscarriages of Justice

P.C. 2002-1951  2002-11-21

Her Excellency the GovernorGeneral in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Justice,pursuant to subsection 696.1(2)Footnote a and section 696.6Footnote a of theCriminal Code, hereby makes the annexed

Regulations Respecting Applications for Ministerial Review — Miscarriages of Justice.

• Return to footnote aS.C. 2002, c. 13, s. 71