Hopkins says he won’t call evidence in his defence at sexual assault trial

Stephen Hopkins unsucessfully attempted to block DNA evidence

While sheriffs were attempting to serve subpoenas on a handful of people he had intended to call to testify, Stephen Hopkins told a St. John’s court Friday he had changed his mind and won’t be calling any evidence in his defence at trial.

Hopkins made the statement at the very end of the day, after Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court Justice Donald Burrage had ruled to dismiss his application to exclude his DNA from the Crown’s evidence against him.

After prosecutor Jennifer Standen called her final witness last week, Hopkins opted to challenge the warrant the Royal Newfoundland Constabulary obtained for a sample of his DNA in connection with a September 2020 sexual assault on a teenage girl, alleging police had purposely misled a judge into signing it by providing false and irrelevant information about the case.

Hopkins is charged with break and entry, unlawful confinement, sexual assault, uttering threats and breaching a probation order after he allegedly asked a 17-year-old girl sitting on the front step of her family’s west-end home for a glass of water then pushed her into the house, sexually assaulted her and threatened to burn the residence down if she told anyone.

Despite advice from the court to the contrary, Hopkins has chosen to self-represent, engaging in complex, lengthy and often convoluted lines of questioning when cross-examining witnesses that have prompted Burrage and amicus curiae John Brooks to interrupt with explanations of the law and encouragement to move things along.

Hopkins’ DNA sample, obtained with the warrant, proved a match to a DNA profile on a swab collected from the teenager by a pediatrician during a sexual assault exam, the court heard from Crown witnesses.

Hopkins spent the majority of Friday questioning RNC Sgt. Ryan Pittman, who had authored the document police presented to provincial court Judge David Orr when they applied for the DNA warrant last year. As he had done Thursday, Hopkins suggested police had used false information to get the warrant. He also focused on Pittman’s mention of the complainant’s dog in the document, alleging the information was included as part of an effort to “psychologically condition” the judge into believing Hopkins was guilty.

He asked the officer if he had considered Orr might interpret the information about the dog as a symbol of “sexual valor,” receiving a bewildered response from the trial judge.

“Are you saying ‘sexual valor?’,” Burrage asked.

“Yeah, like calling a boy a dog,” Hopkins replied.

Standen interjected.

“This is not a literature class, I think it’s clear from the (document) that the dog is a dog. There’s no symbolism behind what the dog is,” she submitted.

Burrage asked Hopkins to confirm what he meant by the question.

“I’m asking if it occurred to Sgt. Pittman that it may have occurred in the mind of Judge Orr that the dog reference may have been symbolic of such,” Hopkins explained,” leading Burrage to reply, “Wow.”

“My answer is no,” Pittman spoke up.

At another point, Hopkins accused Burrage of signing the DNA warrant for Orr.

In his final arguments on the warrant application, Hopkins submitted there was no evidence to suggest his DNA sample had not been tampered with “or even existed,” and said it was “non-sensical” that his DNA would have been recovered during the sexual assault exam.

“The grounds as stated do not suggest a reasonable basis on which to issue the warrant,” he argued. “The proper course for Judge Orr to have taken was to weigh my protected rights against the interests of justice in the collection of my DNA.”

Burrage dismissed the application to exclude the warrant, saying he had heard no evidence to support Hopkins’ allegations.

After Standen formally closed the Crown’s case, Hopkins, who had previously indicated he would be calling three police officers — including Pittman — and two civilians in his defence, told the court he had changed his mind and wouldn’t be calling any evidence.

At the suggestion of the amicus, Burrage offered Hopkins the weekend to consider his decision.

“4:15 on a Friday afternoon after two long days is not conducive to clear thought,” the judge told the accused, scheduling the matter to resume on Monday and directing Hopkins to be ready to present his final submissions if he doesn’t call witnesses.