Nunavut man fails to convince judge to withdraw his guilty pleas

A Nunavut man’s guilty pleas on charges of assault and sexual assault from 2019 will stand, although he asked the court to see them withdrawn.

Nunavut Justice Paul Bychok recently rejected an application to withdraw guilty pleas that was filed by a lawyer in February on behalf of Kelly Akpaleapik.

Akpaleapik said he wanted to withdraw his guilty pleas, plead not guilty and request another trial because he had been harassed by the complainant and hadn’t received good legal advice.

But, in his judgment released on April 29 by the Nunavut Court of Justice, Bychok concluded that “Akpaleapik has not satisfied me that there is a reasonable possibility that he would not have pleaded guilty in different circumstances.”

To be successful in his bid to overturn the guilty pleas, Akpaleapik would have had to satisfy Bychok that his pleas were not voluntary, that they were uncertain and that they were not informed.

Akpaleapik also had to show Bychok that there was a “reasonable possibility” that he would have not pleaded guilty if the circumstances had been different.

To that end, Akpaleapik submitted a short list of points as a sworn affidavit to support his application.

In it, Akpaleapik said he was under “considerable pressure” from the complainant, who he alleges had harassed him and his common-law spouse.

“I plead guilty in the misplaced hope that the harassment would stop once the charges were dealt with,” Akpaleapik said. “The harassment continued. I am not guilty of the charges and I believe I have a good defence to those charges.”

“I wish to withdraw my guilty pleas and proceed to trial.”

During further testimony presented to Bychok in court, Akpaleapik claimed that he had reported this harassment many times to the police, but that the police did nothing because the complainant was a civilian RCMP employee.

“This is a serious allegation. It is easy to make allegations when there is no one present to refute them,” Bychok said in his judgment.

“As Mr. Akpaleapik had to show a reasonable possibility he would not have pled guilty, I would have expected the defence to subpoena police records outlining these many alleged reports to the police.”

Akpaleapik also stated in court for the first time that the lawyer who represented him for close to a year never listened to him, Bychok said.

“She had, he said ‘deaf ears,'” Bychok related in his judgment. “This, again, is a very serious allegation. This time, one made against an officer of this court.”

Bychok was not convinced and said Akpaleapik’s allegations against others were “self-serving” and “unsubstantiated.”

“The applicant needs to put his best foot forward if he is to show a reasonable possibility he would not have pled guilty,” Bychok said.

Bychok said Akpaleapik has not “satisfied me that there is a reasonable possibility that he would not have pleaded guilty in different circumstances.”

“Mr. Akpaleapik’s case will proceed to sentencing,” he said.

R v Akpaleapik, 2020 NUCJ 1… by NunatsiaqNews on Scribd