Glenn Sandberg

The offender was convicted of possession of property obtained by crime and money laundering after turning a blind eye to his spouse's $1 million fraud against her employer.

The Crown sought a three-year penitentiary sentence, while the defence sought two years.

Emphasizing denunciation and deterrence, the court sentenced the offender to 30 months' incarceration and imposed an $800,000 free-standing restitution order, joint and several with his spouse.

The accused was charged with possession of property over $5,000 obtained by crime and money laundering.

The charges arose from a fraud committed by the accused's wife against her employer, totalling over $1,000,000.

The fraudulently obtained funds were deposited into a joint account and used to purchase various assets, including vehicles, trailers, and home renovations.

The court found that the accused either had actual knowledge that the funds were obtained illegally or was wilfully blind to their origin, given numerous red flags such as his wife's prior fraud conviction, bad credit, and the sudden influx of unexplained wealth.

The accused was found guilty of both offences.

The defendant, a Passport Canada officer, was charged with breach of trust, forgery, and related offences for her role in a scheme that enabled imposters to obtain genuine Canadian passports.

The Crown alleged she knowingly allowed applicants with counterfeit documents to bypass normal screening procedures and approved their applications.

The Superior Court of Justice found that the circumstantial evidence overwhelmingly established her knowing participation in the scheme.

The defendant was found guilty on all counts, with the court applying the doctrine of innocent agency to hold her liable as a principal for the forgery offences committed by other unwitting passport employees.

The accused, a physician, was charged with one count of sexual assault against his employee.

The Crown alleged multiple incidents of unwanted touching and attempted kissing in the workplace, set against a backdrop of admitted sexual harassment.

The court applied the W.(D.) framework to assess credibility, rejecting the accused's denials as implausible and inconsistent.

Finding the complainant's evidence credible and corroborated in part by other witnesses, the court concluded that at least one incident of sexual assault—rubbing his groin against her leg—was proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

A conviction was entered.