The courtroom rarely lends itself to the riveting drama that is depicted in a television series. While the recent tax-evasion proceedings haven't exactly been riveting, thanks to their strange predictability, it has certainly been interesting.
As the resident court reporter for the Estevan Mercury, I have become accustomed to the everyday goings on in a courtroom.
The proceedings for Norman and Dorothy Desautels, who have been found guilty of evading about $90,000 in income taxes between 2004 and 2008, could be considered anything but typical courtroom drama. A friend of the Desautels told me during the trial that I was getting an "education" by covering the matter.
Karl Bazin, the presiding judge, has certainly given the Desautels the opportunity to argue their case. The lawyer prosecuting the case told me she has dealt with other judges who have simply yelled at the defendants who argue their matters the way the Desautels have. The Crown calls them "tax protesters."
The couple has questioned the judge's authority in the courtroom, accused him of committing treason and, according to the prosecutor, shown the court particular disrespect by sending a letter to the courthouse asking that the judge and police just quit bothering them.
Bazin addressed that during proceedings last week, noting that "the court has a thick skin." Clearly the judge, who is still new to the post and has yet to finish his first year, has been unfazed by the Desautels' comments.
I even recall the first day of the trial, when Bazin repeatedly told them to sit down and stop talking. I couldn't count those instances on all my digits that day, all the while thinking, "What does a brother gotta do to get a contempt of court charge in here?"
Instead the judge exercised his patience to a level I haven't seen outside of a customer service rep. It was almost as if someone bet him that he wouldn't be able to keep his cool in the courtroom, and he made a deal with the devil to never lose another wager. Watching these matters unfold was a clinic in patience, and I'm a pretty patient person myself. Even I would look over at the judge at times, wondering, "Are you just gonna take that?"
While covering the proceedings last week, it also marked the first time I was directly addressed during the defendant's address to the judge. I've had incidental conversations with others, particularly if they ask if I am going to print their name, but this was something else.
The Desautels looked at me and suggested that the proceedings were not a public matter and shouldn't be printed in a newspaper. It may be a private matter, but because it is happening inside an institution as public as a courtroom, it is very open to public scrutiny.
The media has two roles to play when covering the court system. One is to identify individuals who have wronged the community, so the public can see that justice is served.
The other is to protect convicted individuals, so they are not taken advantage of by the legal system. That is particularly important in a matter such as the one I've been discussing, as the Desautels are not represented by counsel.
Somebody has to watch the watchmen or judge the judge, and that somebody is the public.
