The appellant appealed a conviction for luring a child to engage in sexual activity arising from an undercover online investigation.
The principal issue was whether the proceedings should have been stayed for entrapment.
Applying the entrapment framework, the court held that the police had reasonable grounds to suspect criminal activity from the advertisement and ensuing communications, and did not induce the offence.
Additional grounds concerning jury trial, warrant naming errors, medical condition, psychological assessment methodology, and alleged evidence tampering were all rejected.
The conviction appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal sentence was also dismissed.
