A Canadian man found guilty of harassing his lawyer over a criminal case in Bermuda has had his conviction upheld by an Ontario Court.

Peter Sagos was arrested in Bermuda in 2009 as part of an investigation into a drug-smuggling plot and later pleaded guilty to possessing the proceeds of criminal activity.

According to a recent ruling by the Court of Appeal of Ontario, he subsequently began to send abusive and threatening e-mails to his former lawyer in Canada.

While he was convicted of that offence in 2018, he launched an appeal on the basis that his lawyer in the harassment trial had “provided ineffective assistance”.

But Justice of Appeal David Doherty said in an August 12 decision: “This was a straightforward case. The contents of the e-mails, which made up the essence of the allegations, were not in issue.

“The appellant’s explanations for the e-mails, as introduced through his police statements and his interpretation of the language he used in the e-mails, put a non-culpable explanation for his conduct before the court. The trial judge considered and ultimately rejected that explanation.

“The trial judge’s assessment of the evidence, fully warranted on the record, and not anything trial counsel did or failed to do, fully explains the convictions.”

The Bermuda Supreme Court heard that Sagos was arrested in 2009 as part of an investigation into a boat found with thousands of dollars in cash and a revolver 13 miles off the coast of the island.

Andrew Blatchley, who owned the boat, told police that he had been involved in a cannabis-smuggling operation and that he had received the cash from Sagos.

Sagos denied wrongdoing when interviewed by police, but pleaded guilty in 2010 to possessing the proceeds of criminal activity.

He was sentenced to a year in prison with time served taken into account and, because of his time spent in custody, was released within days.

The Canadian court heard that after his arrest, Sagos's family members contacted a lawyer in Ottawa who in turn recommended counsel in Bermuda.

After Sagos returned to Canada, he launched lawsuits against his Ottawa lawyer, the Ottawa Police Service and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

Justice of Appeal Doherty summarised: “The appellant had come to believe that he was a victim of police corruption and that the Bermuda authorities, the RCMP and the Ottawa police were all conspiring to falsely accuse him of crimes.

“The appellant claimed that he had been kidnapped by the Bermuda police. In fact, he had been arrested and held in custody.”

Sagos also claimed that the Canadian lawyer had improperly withheld disclosure that the Bermudian authorities provided and owed him $125,000.

After his complaints were dismissed, the court heard he began to send abusive e-mails to his former lawyer.

The lawyer did not initially feel threatened by the e-mails, but the tone escalated until November 2016 when Sagos threatened to sell the alleged $125,000 debt “to people that do not ask questions”.

The lawyer, concerned for his and his family’s safety, reported Sagos to the police.

He was subsequently arrested, charged with criminal harassment and extortion.

Upon his conviction in 2018, he received a suspended sentence.

In his appeal to overturn the conviction, Sagos argued his lawyer in the harassment trial pursued several arguments that were bound to fail.

The Court of Appeal said that while Sagos chose not to take the stand in his own defence during the trial, his position as argued was that the e-mails were not intended to be threatening

Justice of Appeal Doherty said: “Despite the many allegations of ineffective assistance, there is no suggestion the appellant did not receive proper advice as to his right to testify or did not make an informed decision in that regard.

“In the absence of any evidence from the appellant, the only realistic defence available was a defence based on the explanation for, and interpretation of, the e-mails the appellant provided to the police.”

Sagos also argued that the trial lawyer had not considered attorney-client privilege when considering if they should object to prosecution evidence, which Justice of Appeal Doherty dismissed.

“Given the serious allegations of professional misconduct the appellant had made against his former lawyer in numerous forums, it is difficult to see how any of the privilege could have survived,” he said.

The Court upheld the decision of the Ontario Court of Justice and dismissed the appeal.

• It is The Royal Gazette’s policy not to allow comments on stories regarding court cases. As we are legally liable for any slanderous or defamatory comments made on our website, this move is for our protection as well as that of our readers.