Céline Harrington

The accused was charged with conspiracy to facilitate terrorist activity contrary to ss. 83.19 and 465(1)(c) of the Criminal Code after a recorded meeting in which he discussed forming a group to support violent jihad with two individuals already engaged in a terrorist conspiracy.

The Crown relied heavily on wiretap evidence capturing the meeting and argued that the accused had agreed to join the conspiracy.

The accused testified that he only feigned agreement to avoid confrontation and had no genuine intention to participate.

The court rejected significant portions of the accused’s testimony but concluded that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he sincerely intended to join the conspiracy.

The court held that while the accused may have sympathized with jihadist causes, the evidence left a reasonable doubt as to whether he had the requisite mens rea to agree to the conspiracy.

The accused was charged with multiple counts relating to trafficking in cocaine and possession for the purpose of trafficking following undercover police operations involving text message communications.

The accused argued that he was entrapped because the undercover officer used flirtatious and sexually suggestive messages to induce him to sell cocaine.

The court applied the entrapment framework from R. v. Mack and held that the police had reasonable suspicion that the accused was engaged in drug trafficking before initiating contact.

Although the officer used sexually suggestive language to build rapport, she never promised sexual favours or rewards in exchange for drugs.

The court concluded that the accused was already engaged in drug trafficking and that the transactions were ordinary business exchanges rather than inducement by police conduct.