Tara Brutzki

The accused, Patrick O’Keese, was charged with second-degree murder and two counts of breach of recognizance.

The Crown alleged O'Keese murdered Brayden Moonias and then attacked Eric Lawson.

The court found that while an unlawful act caused Moonias's death, the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that O'Keese committed the assault.

The court found reasonable alternative inferences regarding the timing of the Lawson attack, which impacted the interpretation of O'Keese's post-offence conduct.

Consequently, O'Keese was acquitted of murder and manslaughter but convicted on both breach of recognizance counts.

The accused, Jason Davidson, was charged with sexual assault.

The complainant, A.K., who has mental and physical challenges, alleged that Davidson committed anal intercourse without her consent.

The court considered the complainant's testimony, which included prior consensual sexual interactions with the accused, and her admission that she performed the act "to please him." Despite finding that the sexual touching occurred, the court found a reasonable doubt regarding the absence of consent, particularly due to inconsistencies in the complainant's statements, her withholding of information from police, and her actions immediately following the alleged assault.

Davidson was acquitted.

At a preliminary inquiry, the defendant was charged with attempted murder under s. 239 of the Criminal Code for an alleged assault on the complainant on August 18, 2014.

The Crown presented evidence of a brutal beating with a wooden board that resulted in serious injuries including a lacerated liver, broken ribs, broken arm, and head injury requiring a three-and-a-half-week coma.

The defendant did not testify but called one witness.

The central issue was whether there was sufficient evidence to establish the specific intent to kill required for attempted murder, or whether the evidence only supported a committal on the lesser charge of aggravated assault under s. 268 of the Criminal Code.

The accused was charged with five offences arising from an incident on March 8, 2012: two counts of aggravated assault against his mother and her boyfriend, one count of resisting arrest, and two counts of breach of probation.

The central issue was the credibility of the mother's testimony, which changed dramatically between her testimony as a Crown witness and her testimony as a defence witness.

The Crown's evidence established that the accused assaulted both victims.

The defence argued that the mother's injuries were caused by the boyfriend slapping her, resulting in her falling against furniture.

The court rejected the mother's defence testimony as internally inconsistent, contradicted by her own earlier statements, and incongruent with physical and forensic evidence.

The court found the accused guilty of aggravated assault against his mother, assault causing bodily harm against the boyfriend, resisting arrest, and both counts of breach of probation.

The accused was charged with sexual assault, sexual interference with a minor, breaking and entering, and three counts of failure to comply with undertaking conditions.

The Crown proceeded by indictment on the sexual assault charge.

The central issue was consent.

The complainant, a 15-year-old girl, was highly intoxicated and largely unconscious when the accused engaged in sexual intercourse with her, including anal intercourse.

The accused admitted the sexual contact occurred but claimed the complainant consented.

The court found the complainant incapable of consenting due to her extreme intoxication and unconsciousness, and that the accused failed to take reasonable steps to ascertain consent.

The court convicted the accused of sexual assault.