Legal saga not over for Lutczyk
By Joel Wittnebel/The Oshawa Express
After more than three years in prison, months of pretrial and legal wrangling, which culminated with Robert Lutczyk’s guilty plea in an Oshawa courtroom on Dec. 1, things still are not over for the former Oshawa city councillor.
Lutczyk will wait until Feb. 4 to be sentenced after he pleaded guilty to charges that stemmed from his gunpoint kidnapping of Oshawa city solicitor David Potts in 2012, more than three years after the incident.
However, according to Lutcyk’s lawyer Chris Murphy, things may not end there either.
For the majority of the lengthy legal process, Lutczyk has been self-represented because, as he says, he is unable to afford a lawyer. After being denied legal aid, Lutczyk filed a Rowbothum application in 2014, or a request to have a lawyer appointed to his case. These applications are used to appoint lawyers for those denied legal funding but face serious or complex charges. In August of 2014 that application was denied.
Then, this September, Murphy filed a second Rowbothum for Lutczyk, and this time it was approved by Justice Hugh O’Connell.
“It has always been my position, obviously, that it’s required in this case because of the complexity of the case and the various issues that arose,” Murphy tells The Oshawa Express of Lutczyk being appointed publicly funded representation. “It was at that point he had council for the first time and was able to essentially obtain legal advice on this.”
Appointed as Lutczyk’s lawyer, Murphy was already familiar with the workings of the case, having been working as a friend of the court for Lutczyk throughout the pretrial.
It was the start of the process that would lead to Lutczyk’s eventual guilty plea.
“Ultimately, I think Mr. Lutczyk just wanted to accept responsibility for what he had done and he did that,” Murphy said.
Now, the crown has thrown a curveball and filed an appeal of O’Connell’s decision to appoint Lutczyk representation, and if successful, it could mean Lutczyk could be facing another legal battle.
“If Mr. Lutcyk would have run his trial with council and he loses the appeal, it would have theoretically been possible that at the end of the case, regardless of the outcome of the case itself, that the attorney general might attempt to obtain a judgement for all the money that was paid to me,” Murphy explains.
This means, after serving his eventual sentence, Lutcyk could have a costly judgement hanging over his head if the crown is to pursue the lawsuit.
“It’s something that, coming out of custody, you wouldn’t want a judgement like that hanging against you,” Murphy says. “I believe it would just be crippling for anybody to come out of custody and have a potential judgement when you’re trying to get your life back in order.”
The appeal of O’Connel’s decision has not yet been heard in court and requests for comment from the attorney general’s office were not returned to The Oshawa Express as of press time.
Murphy believes that when Lutczyk is slated to be back in court on Feb. 4, the crown will be seeking an additional four years in custody, on top of the time Lutczyk has already served.