Former fashion mogul Peter Nygard, who was found guilty of four counts of sexual assault and sentenced to 11 years in prison, is seeking bail as he appeals his convictions. Nygard’s legal team argues that the judge who denied his bail application made errors, including discounting the value of a new medical report. The judge had expressed concerns about Nygard being a flight risk and the weakness of his appeal. Nygard’s lawyers will appear before the Court of Appeal for Ontario to argue their case.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario will review Nygard’s bail application, which was rejected by a judge who deemed his appeal weak and raised concerns about him being a flight risk due to facing charges in other jurisdictions. Nygard’s lawyers argue that the judge erred in discounting the value of a new medical report submitted by Nygard. The report relied heavily on self-reported information and the judge had stated that Nygard’s health needs were considered during sentencing. Nygard’s legal team is expected to present their arguments in front of the Appeal Court Justice Lene Madsen.
Nygard’s legal team has raised several grounds for appeal, including the argument that his sentence is excessive and that the trial judge made errors in admitting expert evidence on the effects of trauma. Nygard was found guilty of sexually assaulting multiple women dating back to the 1980s until the mid-2000s. He was sentenced to 11 years in prison, but with time already served, he would have less than seven years left to serve. The Court of Appeal for Ontario will review his case to determine if any errors were made during the trial and sentencing process.
The motions judge who denied Nygard’s bail application had expressed concerns about the strength of his appeal and the potential for him to flee due to facing charges in other jurisdictions. Nygard’s legal team argues that the judge unfairly discounted the value of a new medical report submitted by Nygard. The report, which relied heavily on self-reported information, was intended to address Nygard’s health needs. The Appeal Court will review these arguments and determine if Nygard should be granted bail while he appeals his convictions and sentence.
Nygard’s lawyers are set to appear before the Court of Appeal for Ontario to argue that the motions judge made errors in dismissing Nygard’s bail application. The judge had raised concerns about the strength of Nygard’s appeal and the possibility of him fleeing due to facing charges in other jurisdictions. Nygard was found guilty of sexual assault and sentenced to 11 years in prison, with less than seven years left to serve after factoring in time already served. The Court of Appeal will review Nygard’s case to determine if any errors were made during the trial and sentencing process.
Nygard’s legal team is seeking a review of the decision to deny him bail as he appeals his sexual assault convictions and sentence. They argue that the motions judge made errors in dismissing his bail application, including discounting the value of a new medical report. The judge had expressed concerns about Nygard being a flight risk and the weakness of his appeal. It will be up to the Court of Appeal for Ontario to review the arguments presented by Nygard’s legal team and decide whether he should be granted bail while his appeal is ongoing.
