(File photo/paNOW)

By Susan McNeil

Cattle as witnesses

Bjorkdale rancher debates cattle as witnesses with judges to no avail

Jul 5, 2022 | 2:00 PM

“I can assure you, sir, that you are not bringing cattle to court. Don’t even go there”; words heard as part of a Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision ending a Bjorkdale rancher’s attempt to keep his cattle.

Alexander Potoreyko was found guilty of causing unnecessary pain and suffering to cattle in Melfort Provincial Court on charges stemming from an investigation in 2017.

After being fined $7,000, he was also told he couldn’t own, possess or have custody of cattle for the next decade.

The Court of Queen’s Bench later reduced the fine to $2,000.

In the years since, Potoreyko, who is representing himself, has appealed to the Court of Queen’s Bench and then to the Court of Appeal.

First Win of the Season

Baumbach steps up in debut to help North Stars take down Hawks

13h ago

Riders win

Roughriders down Redblacks 29-16 to vault over Lions in CFL's West Division

Sep 28, 2024

Statue unveiling

'A way of hope and resilience': Annie Peyachew statue unveiled in Central Park

Sep 28, 2024

On June 10, the Appeal court denied the argument that the judge made mistakes when Potoreyko was not allowed to call “bovine witnesses” and quote from the Bible or a magazine. He also argued the judge made mistakes by accepting the evidence of Crown witnesses and conducted the trial in an intimidating and biased fashion.

According to the published decision, Potoreyko insisted that the original trial judge agreed that he could call bovine witnesses to the stand.

However, the transcript shows the opposite as the defendant and the judge discuss how many witnesses will be called.

“At least five or six. I can bring my whole cow herd here, if you wish. I don’t mean to be sacrilegious or whatever here, but they can testify too. But animals can’t speak; and these people seem to think that they can and, in fact, they can tell I’m distressed. But that’s my opinion, Your Honour. I hope you respect it,” Potoreyko is quoted as saying.

The court responded by saying “well, actually” before the Crown Prosecutor chimes in with his number of witnesses.

In 2019, Potoreyko was again before the court, claiming that the judge had given him permission to bring live cattle to court or to have them outside in a trailer.

The three judges in the Court of Appeal outlined the job of the trial judge to make sure that only relevant and admissible evidence is presented and to manage the trial.

“Having an out-of-court viewing of the cattle, as they existed several years after the dates of the alleged offences, may not have been particularly relevant to the issues at trial. In any event, it was a highly unusual request that the trial judge was not obliged to accede to. She gave Mr. Potoreyko other options in which he could adduce evidence about the state of his cattle. I see no error of law in any of this,” wrote Madam Justice Schwan on behalf of the court.

Schwan and Judges Richards and Leurer unanimously also dismissed Potoreyko’s other claims. He was given until November 18, 2022 to dispose of any cattle he owns or that are in his care.

—

susan.mcneil@pattisonmedia.com

On Twitter: @northeastNOW_SK