HALIFAX — The lawyer for a man who was wrongfully convicted of statutory rape 45 years ago says a Nova Scotia Supreme Court judge should have found his client's confession was improperly obtained.
The Supreme Court last year cleared the RCMP of wrongdoing and said there was nothing wrong with the way police investigated the case against Gerald Barton, which he is appealing in court today.
Barton had launched a lawsuit against the Mounties alleging negligent investigation.
In a decision last May, Judge James Chipman said Earl Hamilton, an RCMP corporal at the time, interviewed the right people and properly obtained an incriminating statement from Barton, then 19.
Dale Dunlop is arguing before five judges of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal that Chipman didn't have enough evidence to find the confession was properly obtained and his client should have been awarded compensation.
He also says the Charter of Rights and Freedoms may have been violated when the province refused to negotiate compensation with Barton over the past four years.
Chipman's decision concluded that Barton's rights had not been breached even though there had been a miscarriage of justice and no compensation from the province or police.
He also said Barton did not provide any evidence in his lawsuit that the defendants caused him serious psychological harm beyond the "ordinary stress" that comes with litigation.
Barton spent a few hours in jail and was sentenced to a year of probation after he was convicted of statutory rape in 1970 — a conviction that was thrown out in 2011.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal quashed the conviction after the complainant recanted her story and blamed her brother for getting her pregnant.
DNA testing showed her brother was 1.9 million times more likely to be the father of the boy than anyone else. He was later charged with indecent assault, but the charge was dismissed in 2009.
His name and that of his siblings and immediate family are protected by a publication ban.
