Jaki Freeman

The three accused, Amandeep Jodha, Manjot Chadde, and Gurvir Deol, were charged with aggravated assault and assault with a weapon following a violent brawl.

The Crown's theory relied on identifying the perpetrators and establishing a common intention to bring weapons.

The court found all three accused not guilty, concluding that the Crown failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt due to the unreliability and internal inconsistencies of all witness testimonies, making it impossible to identify the perpetrators.

A joint application for a stay of proceedings based on s.11(b) Charter delay was dismissed as moot, though the court noted it would have been dismissed on its merits due to a combination of defence delay, inherent delay, and exceptional circumstances.

Emilio Georgiev was found guilty by a jury of robbery, assault causing bodily harm, aggravated assault, uttering a threat to cause death, and possession of a weapon for a dangerous purpose.

The victim, who is legally blind, was attacked with a knife, robbed, and had his CNIB cane stolen.

The Crown sought a sentence of 10 to 12 years, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence due to the violent, callous nature of the crimes, the vulnerability of the victim, the use of a weapon, and the offender's criminal record and commission of the offences while on bail.

Defence counsel sought a sentence of 2 to 4 years or time served, highlighting the offender's youth, family support, work ethic, and lack of permanent physical injury to the victim.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the victim's vulnerability, the gratuitous theft of the CNIB cane, the use of a weapon, and the offender's criminal history and bail status.

Mitigating factors included family support, work ethic, and rehabilitation goals.

The court sentenced the offender to 7 years imprisonment, less 771 days for pretrial custody (calculated at 1.5:1), and imposed a lifetime firearms prohibition and a DNA order.

Enhanced credit for harsh incarceration conditions was denied due to lack of evidence of adverse effect on the offender.

The offender was convicted of manslaughter as a party to a shooting death committed by a co-accused.

The Crown sought a sentence of six to eight years, arguing the four-year mandatory minimum for manslaughter with a firearm applied.

The court found the offender did not know the co-accused had a gun and held that the mandatory minimum does not apply in such circumstances.

Weighing the offender's lack of prior record, strong prospects for rehabilitation, and lesser degree of responsibility against the gravity of the offence, the court imposed a sentence of four years (credited as time served) followed by two years' probation.