Kimberly Sharpe

The Ontario Court of Justice convicted Todd Snow of sexual assault, failure to comply with probation, and failure to comply with a peace bond.

The complainant alleged non-consensual vaginal intercourse, while the defendant claimed consensual oral sex.

DNA evidence linked the defendant to the complainant’s external genitalia and vaginal swabs, strongly supporting the Crown’s case.

The defendant’s prior statement denying any sexual contact was found to be fabricated to conceal guilt.

The court accepted the complainant’s testimony as credible despite her prior convictions and challenges related to fetal alcohol spectrum disorder.

The decision highlights the importance of DNA evidence and the legal distinction between disbelief and fabrication of exculpatory statements.

The applicant, convicted of first-degree murder, brought a motion within his appeal for an order directing investigating officers and a forensic scientist to attend for cross-examination.

He sought to support a fresh evidence application regarding DNA records, alleging that the National DNA Data Bank possessed undisclosed original DNA profile data.

The Court of Appeal dismissed the application, finding that the applicant failed to establish a reasonable possibility that further relevant material existed, as required by the Trotta and Chaplin tests.

The applicant sought bail pending appeal following convictions for sexual exploitation and sexual assault against a minor and a custodial sentence of five months.

The court considered the criteria under s. 679(3) of the Criminal Code, including whether the appeal was frivolous, whether the applicant would surrender into custody, and whether detention was necessary in the public interest.

The Crown conceded the second and third criteria but argued the appeal lacked merit.

After reviewing the four proposed grounds of appeal concerning character evidence, alleged misapprehension of GPS evidence, DNA contamination issues, and reliance on a transcript of a police statement, the court concluded none demonstrated arguable merit.

The applicant failed to establish that the appeal was not frivolous and the bail application was dismissed.