3 total
The court dismissed a police officer's application for a stay of proceedings based on entrapment, finding the undercover integrity plays were justified by reasonable suspicion and did not induce the breach of trust.
The defendant, Kara Darnley, an Ontario Provincial Police officer, was found guilty by a jury of two counts of breach of trust.
She applied for a stay of proceedings for one conviction, alleging entrapment by police undercover operations.
The court dismissed the application, finding that the police had reasonable suspicion to initiate the investigation and the "integrity plays" (undercover scenarios).
The court concluded that the police conduct did not go beyond merely providing an opportunity for the commission of the crime and did not induce the offence, thus failing to meet the test for entrapment.
Custody Relief granted
The accused pleaded guilty to 11 charges involving child pornography, sexual offences against children, bestiality, and conspiracy charges.
The Crown sought a Long Term Offender (LTO) designation with a sentence of 4 to 6 years and a 10-year supervision order.
The defence sought a sentence of 2 years less 1 day with probation.
The court found the accused met all three LTO criteria and imposed a global sentence of 3 years imprisonment, with credit for pre-trial custody resulting in 193 days to be served, followed by a 4-year Long Term Supervision Order.
The court emphasized that the accused's offences, committed in furtherance of an abusive relationship with an older male, involved serious crimes against children and required significant denunciation and deterrence.
The court granted media access to an agreed statement of facts subject to an ongoing publication ban.
Media representatives applied for a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts filed in support of guilty pleas by the accused.
The court granted the application and ordered that the Agreed Statement of Facts be provided to the media.
However, the court reminded all parties that a publication ban under s.539 of the Criminal Code applies to all common evidence heard at the preliminary hearing and continues until all parties have been discharged or completed trial, as two co-accuseds remained in ongoing preliminary hearings.