D. Bayliss

The accused applied for a stay of proceedings under s. 24(1) of the Charter, alleging he was assaulted by police detectives after his arrest for armed robbery.

The accused claimed the officers beat him in an unmonitored interview room to extract a confession, washed his blood-stained shirt to conceal the assault, and deliberately conducted his videotaped interview with his back to the camera.

The court found the accused's evidence credible and concluded that the officers had indeed assaulted him and attempted to cover it up.

The court held that the police misconduct was so offensive to societal notions of fair play and decency that it fell into the residual category of abuse of process.

The application was granted and the proceedings were stayed.

The accused was charged with unlawfully importing cocaine into Canada after arriving at Pearson International Airport from Jamaica with cocaine dissolved in two bottles of ginger wine.

The accused claimed she was an innocent blind courier who had been set up by an acquaintance who paid for her trip.

The court rejected her exculpatory evidence as implausible, noting her financial distress, the high value of the drugs, and inconsistencies in her testimony.

Applying the W.(D.) framework and principles of circumstantial evidence, the court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew she was importing a prohibited substance and found her guilty.

During a judge‑alone criminal trial, the accused applied for a directed verdict of acquittal after the Crown closed its case.

Police executing a search warrant at an apartment discovered a loaded restricted firearm hidden inside a couch cushion and quantities of cocaine and marihuana elsewhere in the unit.

The accused was present in the living room but was not a resident of the apartment, which was leased to another individual.

The court held that the circumstantial evidence could not reasonably support inferences of knowledge or control over the firearm or drugs, which were either hidden or insufficiently connected to the accused beyond proximity.

As a result, the evidence was incapable of supporting convictions for possession of the firearm or drugs for the purpose of trafficking.