VANCOUVER.Aug 11, 2004
TheGlobe and Mail
A 30-minute time-out was called at the Air-India trial yesterday after
Crown prosecutor Richard Cairns suggested a defence witness was "an
idiot."
"That's a remarkable thing to say," Mr. Justice Ian Bruce
Josephson said, interrupting Mr. Cairns's questioning of witness Kamal
Jit of New York. "You may make direct submissions to me, but it
will be in the proper forum.
"Suggesting to the witness he's an idiot is outrageous,"
the judge said, before ordering a break.
The unusual flash of temper in the normally staid courtroom occurred
while Mr. Cairns was probing whether the witness's understanding of
English was as poor as he contended during cross-examination by the
prosecution.
The defence called Mr. Jit to the witness box in an attempt to discredit
the testimony of a central prosecution witness in the case against Kamloops
mill worker Ajaib Singh Bagri.
Mr. Bagri is accused of taking baggage with explosives to the airport
on June 23, 1985. The explosives blew up hours later on opposite sides
of the world, killing 331 people -- 329 on Air-India Flight 182 over
the Atlantic and two baggage handlers in Tokyo.
The prosecution witness had testified that Mr. Bagri told him during
a conversation shortly after the bomb blasts that he had been involved
in the bombings.
The RCMP paid the witness $300,000 (U.S.) after he agreed to testify
against Mr. Bagri. A court order prohibits the news media from identifying
the witness.
Mr. Jit told the court this week the prosecution witness offered to
change his testimony if the defence coached him on what to say. The
witness also offered to disappear before testifying if the Bagri family
gave him some money, Mr. Jit said.
Mr. Jit, 48, came to the United States in 1985. He was taught English
in grade school and took English as an academic subject at university
before moving to the U.S.
He told the court his wife and son are fluent in English. He is currently
a cab driver in New York.
He testified on Monday mostly in English, relying occasionally on a
Punjabi-language translator to clarify his remarks. However, he spoke
only through a translator when Mr. Cairns was questioning him.
Mr. Cairns told the court that he interviewed Mr. Jit on May 5 at his
home in New York in anticipation of the evidence he was to provide during
the trial. They spoke in English.
An RCMP officer took notes during the exchanges.
However, Mr. Jit's testimony earlier this week differed from the account
of his remarks in May. When confronted with inconsistencies between
his testimony and his statements in May, Mr. Jit said he did not understand
what Mr. Cairns was asking.
Mr. Cairns asked whether his understanding of English had diminished
since May. "On May 5, 2004, you answered questions in English when
questions were asked of you in English," Mr. Cairns said.
"I do not really remember, when I did not understand the question,
how I answered," Mr. Jit said in Punjabi.
Patiently working through several exchanges from May before losing
control, Mr. Cairns asked whether police notes of the interview were
accurate. Mr. Jit repeatedly said no, and denied making comments attributed
to him by the police. On several occasions, he did not respond directly
to Mr. Cairns's questions, instead providing answers to questions that
were not asked.
At the time of the flare-up, Mr. Cairns had tried three times to have
Mr. Jit confirm that he had been asked in May about some comments made
by the prosecution witness.
Mr. Cairns asked whether he understood the question. Speaking through
the interpreter, Mr. Jit said he did. But Mr. Jit still appeared to
be confused about what he was being asked.
"You said 'yes.' You agree with that," Mr. Cairns said.
"In regard to what, I said 'yes?' " Mr. Jit said.
"In regard to the question you were asked," Mr. Cairns replied.
"What was the question, you tell me?" Mr. Jit asked.
"Sir, are you an idiot?" Mr. Cairns said.
Defence lawyer Richard Peck said the prosecutor's comments were inappropriate.
Mr. Cairns later apologized to the court and to Mr. Jit. "It was
inappropriate and I acknowledge it. It was out of frustration and it
won't happen again," he said.