2 total
The accused received three years in custody for possessing child pornography and obstructing justice.
The accused, Edwin Subia, was found guilty of possession and accessing child pornography, and attempting to obstruct justice.
This decision focuses on the sentencing, where the court considered the nature and quantity of the child pornography, the accused's prior record, and mitigating factors.
The judge declined to view the actual images, relying on detailed descriptions and balancing probative value against prejudicial effects and the open court principle.
The court imposed a sentence of three years in prison for possession, with a concurrent four-month sentence for obstruction of justice, and stayed the accessing charge.
Ancillary orders included a 15-year prohibition on contact with minors and internet use restrictions.
Accused's statements and provision of cell phone password to police ruled voluntary and admissible.
The Crown sought to admit statements made by the accused during a police interview following his arrest for child pornography offences.
The accused argued the statements were involuntary and that his rights under sections 7 and 10(b) of the Charter were breached, particularly when police asked for his cell phone password without restating his right to counsel.
The court found the statements were voluntary, noting the accused had an operating mind and was not subjected to oppressive conditions or inducements.
The court also held that asking for a cell phone password in these circumstances was a routine question that did not require a further opportunity to consult counsel.
The statements were ruled admissible.
