Anneke Ingvaldsen

The defendants were charged with first-degree murder for allegedly assisting two unidentified shooters in killing the victim at a social club.

The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, including cell phone records, GPS data, and surveillance video, to prove the defendants helped position the getaway vehicle and locate the victim.

The court found that while the defendants knowingly assisted in a plan targeting the victim, there was a reasonable doubt as to whether they knew the perpetrators intended to commit murder.

However, applying section 21(2) of the Criminal Code, the court concluded the defendants knew or ought to have known that a probable consequence of their common unlawful purpose was an inherently dangerous act.

Both defendants were found guilty of manslaughter as an included offence.

The court sentenced the offender for historical sexual offences committed against his stepdaughter over about three and a half years, beginning when she was 13.

The judge found numerous aggravating factors, including the prolonged abuse, the parental trust relationship, manipulation to keep the offences secret, and the profound long-term harm to the complainant.

Relying on sentencing principles for sexual offences against children and comparable cases, the court held that denunciation and deterrence had to be emphasized.

The offender received a global penitentiary sentence of eight years, with concurrent two-year sentences on the other counts and several ancillary orders.

The Crown applied to summarily dismiss the defendant's post-conviction Charter application for a stay of proceedings.

The defendant argued that his right to make full answer and defence was breached because the police and child welfare services failed to audio or video record interviews with the complainant in 2004, and certain school records had been routinely destroyed.

The court found that there is no constitutional or common law right requiring the police to record investigative interviews, and the routine destruction of school records did not constitute unacceptable negligence.

Consequently, the court held that the Charter application was manifestly frivolous and granted the Crown's application for summary dismissal.

Michael Katz pleaded guilty to possession of a loaded prohibited firearm, assault police officer with a taser, failing to remain at the scene of an accident, and impaired operation of a motor vehicle.

The offences occurred on Christmas Day 2021, involving a car collision, flight from the scene, and a violent struggle with police where a firearm was discharged and a taser used against an officer.

The Crown sought a 4-year penitentiary sentence, while the defence argued for a conditional sentence of 6-9 months.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the seriousness of firearm offences, the discharge of a loaded weapon on a public street, the assault on a police officer, and the impaired driving.

Mitigating factors included the accused's guilty plea, remorse, lack of prior criminal record, strong family support, and compliance with strict bail conditions.

The court rejected the defence's argument for a sentencing discount due to alleged excessive force by police during arrest, finding the officers' actions reasonable given the dynamic and chaotic circumstances.

The judge found a conditional sentence inappropriate due to the pressing need for denunciation and deterrence.

This criminal trial concerned four counts of sexual assault, touching for a sexual purpose, invitation to sexual touching, and sexual exploitation against the accused, R.T.L., involving the complainant, A., his former stepdaughter.

The alleged offences occurred between 2004 and 2007, when the complainant was between 13 and 16 years old.

The defence challenged the complainant's credibility based on alleged contradictions, generalities, a history of lying (due to prior non-disclosure to authorities), and a motive to lie.

The court meticulously analyzed each defence submission, finding the complainant's explanations for non-disclosure and inconsistencies credible given her age, dependence, and the manipulative nature of the relationship.

Following a trial where Eric Dalton was found guilty of assault, the court delivered its sentencing decision.

The assault was perpetrated against an intimate partner in the victim's home, a relationship characterized by fear.

Despite the Crown's recommendation for a conditional discharge, the court noted the aggravating factors of intimate partner violence and the offender's lack of remorse or insight into the victim's experience.

Considering the offender's challenging background, lack of criminal record, and positive personal goals, the court imposed a conditional discharge with a three-year probation period, including terms for counselling (Partner Abuse Response, Caring Dads, anger management), no contact with the victim, and community service.