Magnotta research interview should be protected, profs say - Action News
Home WebMail Wednesday, November 27, 2024, 02:36 AM | Calgary | -9.1°C | Regions Advertise Login | Our platform is in maintenance mode. Some URLs may not be available. |
Montreal

Magnotta research interview should be protected, profs say

Lawyers for two professors from the University of Ottawa are in court arguing that the contents of an interview conducted with Luka Magnotta as part of a research study should be protected under so-called "confidentiality privilege."

Criminologists argue warrant could threaten future research projects

Luka Magnotta participated in the University of Ottawa research study in 2007. (Montreal police)

Lawyers for two professors from the University of Ottawa are in court arguing that the contents of an interview conducted with Luka Magnotta as part of a research studyshould be protected under so-called "confidentiality privilege."

The study was about sex work and intimacy.

The research in question is a portion of an interview with Magnotta conducted in 2007 by a graduate student working under the criminologists.

After Magnotta's arrest in Berlin last spring, the grad student contacted police andtold investigators he had interviewed the accused several years before as part of a larger project.

The student had signed confidentially documentation, and Magnotta's real name was not used as part of the research.

Police obtained a warrant to seize an audio recording and transcript of that interview, but the contents of it were sealed after the researchers challenged the validity of the seizure.

Magnotta was charged in May with the murder of Concordia University studentJun Lin. A preliminary hearing in the case is underway in Montreal and will resume Monday following a two-week break.

Threat to academic freedom

In a Montreal court Wednesday, lawyers representing the researchers argued that academic freedom is at risk if they are forced to reveal the identity of their subjects and the informationobtained from those interviews.

They pointed to a sex work case in Ontario, which one of the criminologistsworked on, that led to the legalization of some forms of prostitution. That decision could end up before the Supreme Court.

Lawyers representing the criminologist pointed to that case as an indication of the serious nature of theresearch and the implications it could have on public interest issues. They argued that is whyresearchers should have privileges to guarantee anonymity for those who participate in similar projects.

They argued that the work could be hindered in the future if they cannot guarantee confidentiality to their subjects.

The hearing, which is scheduled for two days, resumed this afternoon.