Brandie Stevenson

The Crown sought to admit statements made by three defendants charged in relation to a first degree murder.

The defendants argued the statements were involuntary and obtained in breach of their Charter rights.

The court found all three statements were voluntary.

Mr. Kerr's statement was admitted despite a minor s. 10(b) breach.

Mr. Samuel's statement was admitted as no Charter breaches were established.

Ms. Owen's statement was excluded under s. 24(2) because she was arbitrarily detained and denied her right to counsel during the execution of a search warrant, and the court rejected the Crown's argument that the 'actus reus exception' precluded exclusion.

The accused was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference against a 15-year-old complainant.

The accused raised the defences of mistake of age and consent.

The court applied the three-step framework from Carbone to assess the mistake of age defence, finding that the accused took virtually no steps to ascertain the complainant's age, thereby negating the defence.

The court also found that the complainant did not consent to the sexual activity and that there was no air of reality to the defence of honest but mistaken belief in consent.

The accused was found guilty on both counts.

The Public Guardian and Trustee applied to be appointed as the permanent guardian of property and personal care for a young woman with a developmental disability and a severe seizure disorder.

The respondent father opposed the application, seeking to be appointed guardian himself, despite his ongoing opposition to her medical treatment plan and residential placement.

The court found that the young woman was thriving in her current placement and receiving appropriate medical care.

The court concluded that the father's fervent opposition to her care plan raised concerns that he would interfere with her treatment if appointed, and ordered that the PGT remain as her guardian.