3 total
Custody Accused acquitted
The court sentenced Derek Kenney to 13 years’ incarceration for four counts of sexual assault against four separate complainants.
The decision details the facts of each offence, the circumstances of the offender, the impact on the victims, and the application of sentencing principles under the Criminal Code.
The court considered aggravating and mitigating factors, the positions of Crown and Defence, and the principle of totality, ultimately imposing consecutive sentences and ancillary orders including SOIRA, DNA, and weapons prohibitions.
The accused was acquitted of murder due to reasonable doubt on circumstantial evidence but convicted of breaching recognizance.
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.
Evidence excluded after unjustified warrantless entry into residence investigating alleged animal cruelty.
The accused applied under s. 24(2) of the Charter to exclude evidence obtained after police conducted a warrantless entry into their apartment while investigating suspected animal cruelty.
Officers forcibly entered despite the occupant repeatedly demanding a warrant and despite the absence of ongoing sounds indicating distress.
The court held that exigent circumstances did not exist and that the Crown failed to justify the warrantless search under s. 8 of the Charter.
Statements made by one accused prior to entry were admissible, but statements by the other accused obtained while she was effectively detained without being advised of her right to counsel violated s. 10(b).
Applying the Grant framework, the court excluded the dog, the presence evidence, and the improperly obtained statement.