B. Bentham

The accused brought an application for a review of a bail hearing following a detention order on consent.

He was charged with break and enter, robbery, and pointing a firearm arising from a home invasion.

The court treated the application as a hearing de novo.

The court found the accused failed to meet his onus under the primary, secondary, and tertiary grounds of s. 515(10) of the Criminal Code, noting his extensive criminal record, flight risk, and the gravity of the offence.

The proposed surety was also deemed unsuitable.

The application for release was dismissed.

The applicant, charged with second-degree murder, brought an application to exclude 40 intercepted private communications from evidence at trial.

The applicant argued the intercepts were irrelevant and highly prejudicial.

The Crown argued the intercepts showed consciousness of guilt, including lies to parents, attempts to silence witnesses, and admissions of involvement.

The court conducted a detailed analysis of each intercept, weighing its probative value against its prejudicial effect.

Ultimately, the court admitted a small number of the intercepts that were capable of inferring consciousness of guilt or attempts to silence witnesses, while excluding the majority as irrelevant, overly prejudicial, or lacking probative value.