Jamie MacPherson

The defendant brought a motion to recuse the justice of the peace on grounds of reasonable apprehension of bias.

The defendant's agent alleged that the justice had exhibited hostility towards paralegals and agents in prior proceedings, specifically citing an incident involving another paralegal in a different matter and historical treatment of agents in 2004 when they lacked Law Society licensing.

The justice rejected the motion, finding the allegations were unsubstantiated, lacked specificity, and did not meet the threshold for establishing a reasonable apprehension of bias.

The justice noted that the paralegal in question was not representing the defendant and that the 2004 practice predated the licensing of paralegals by the Law Society.

The defendant was charged with careless driving, turn not in safety, failing to remain at the scene of an accident, and failing to report an accident arising from a motor vehicle collision on July 26, 2015, on Kingston Road in Toronto.

The collision involved the defendant's Pontiac van, a Yamaha motorcycle operated by George Christodoulou (who died), and a Chevrolet operated by Valerie Coates.

The court found that the defendant exercised due diligence in determining he was not involved in the accident, that his turn was made safely and with appropriate care, and that he did not drive carelessly.

The defendant was acquitted on all charges.

The appellant appealed his convictions for improper right turn and failing to surrender his driving licence under the Highway Traffic Act.

The appellant's primary ground of appeal was that he did not receive fair disclosure of the audio portion of the arresting officer's dash-camera recording.

The trial judge found that the Crown had provided full disclosure of the in-car recording on DVD, but the audio had not been recorded due to the officer's failure to activate the audio pack.

The appellant refused to participate in his trial after his requests for the missing audio and an adjournment were denied.

The appeal court upheld the convictions, finding that the appellant received a fair opportunity to make full answer and defence but chose not to participate, and that the trial judge properly handled the disclosure issue and the adjournment request.