Sexual assault allegations have 'taken years off my life,' says accused lawyer
Defence to call expert witness in IT to combat Crown suggestion that digital records were altered
The prosecution hammered away at Robert Regular's testimony Friday morning during a more subdued but often disjointed cross-examination at the lawyer's sexual assault trial.
Regular, 72, continued to deny all allegations that he sexually assaulted the sole complainant when she was a client of his Conception Bay South law office. She also alleged Regular sexually assaulted her when she was 12, while he represented her mother for ongoing child access issues.
Crown prosecutor Deidre Badcock questioned Regular on specifics of his medical prescriptions, billing practices and familiarity with the complainant, whose identity is protected by a publication ban.
The court previously heard testimony that Regular had erectile dysfunction, though no evidence was presented on its severity. Regular was prescribed two types of medications but said he stopped using Viagra after use because it affected his legs, and as a result, his sleep.
"Sir, what I'm going to suggest to you is that on the dates that you had meetings with [the complainant], you knew she was coming, that you took your Viagra earlier in the day, two to three hours in that lead-up, so that you'd be able to engage in sexual intercourse with her," Badcock said.
"I know it's what you think, Ms. Badcock," Regular said. "It's not true — it's absolutely not true."
Morning proceedings were temporarily halted after Badcock began questions about Regular's comfortability with having intercourse in his law office. A similar-fact application, which would allow the Crown to enter evidence that is relevant to the allegations before the court, was denied before the trial.
Defence counsel objected to Badcock raising the issue, despite her arguing they opened the door for it when they called Dr. Douglas Drover to testify about Regular's medical condition and what is considered an optimal environment for intercourse.
"These were after-hours consensual arrangements," Kennedy said, referring to a law society disciplinary decision that Regular appealed and lost in 2011. He was sanctioned for having sex with a client, which had regularly happened in his law office.
After a short deliberation, Justice Vikas Khaladkar ultimately allowed Badcock to ask a single question: "Mr. Regular, were you comfortable having sex in your office?"
"No," he said.
Asked about his familiarity with the complainant, Regular testified that it was a strictly solicitor-client relationship but he was privy to much of her family life, as he represented her parents and some siblings.
He pointed to the children's abusive upbringing and his previous career as a social worker as reasons why he had a soft spot for the family.
Badcock suggested Regular met the complainant, then 12 years old, in her mother's car without her parents present because Regular ought to have known she wasn't allowed with her mother at the time. She had been apprehended by child services over abuse allegations.
Regular called that suggestion "ridiculous."
"It's ridiculous that I would want to meet with her in the middle of the parking lot, next to McDonald's."
A calendar entry for that date in September 2001 indicated he had a meeting scheduled with both mother and child.
During the at-times testy back-and-forth, Badcock asked Regular to bear with him.
"I've been living with this for three years," Regular said of the allegations.
"It's taken years off my life and 20 pounds off my body."
Crown suggests sex for legal services
Badcock returned several times to the topic of billing during cross-examination and repeatedly questioned Regular about why he wouldn't charge the complainant for his legal services in 2012 and 2013.
Regular office made multiple prior attempts to collect outstanding legal fees between 2007 to 2009, when he represented the teen while her baby was at risk of apprehension due to her partner's abusive nature and past issues with child services.
Regular testified it's not unusual to work for free and it can even be profitable down the road if the client continues to return for other more lucrative legal services, like personal injury law.
"The reason I suggest to you that you were collecting — not billing — [the woman] is because you were being paid in sexual favours," Badcock said.
"How hard can I say it — absolutely not," he responded.
As she pressed on, asking why he would do work for free when the court has heard how busy his legal and business affairs were, Regular said he now somewhat regrets his charitable nature.
"I am somebody who has done a lot of charitable work, but for me having done it in this circumstance, I probably wouldn't be here," he said.
"I regret working so much, now. That's the reality.… But I can't get it back now."
The defence told the court Friday it intends to call an expert witness in the field of information technology to combat the Crown's suggestion that Regular's digital records, including calendar entries, were altered. The trial may resume late next week, depending on the court's schedule.
Previous trial coverage:
- 'Absolutely did not happen': Robert Regular denies sexual assault allegations
- Crown opts not to reopen case, recall complainant in Robert Regular trial after judge's error
- Doctor testifies on erectile dysfunction at lawyer's trial in defence attempt to cast doubt on allegations
- Law office staff take stand for defence at lawyer's sexual assault trial
- Crown closes case in Robert Regular trial, with defence set to call evidence Monday
- 'I'm not backpedalling,' complainant insists at trial of lawyer Robert Regular
- Allegations against police officer added to mix at Robert Regular trial
- Trial begins for lawyer accused of sexually assaulting youth, former client
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
