Jenna Wright

The Crown sought an order permitting two witnesses ordinarily resident in the United Kingdom to testify at trial via videoconference pursuant to section 714.2 of the Criminal Code.

The witnesses had testified at the preliminary inquiry by videoconference and were key to the Crown's case, having heard sounds and voices from the room where the alleged murder occurred.

The defence opposed the request, arguing that videoconference testimony would compromise the accused's right to a fair trial and full answer and defence, particularly given the seriousness of the charges and the importance of assessing witness credibility.

The court granted the Crown's request, finding that the witnesses satisfied the requirements of section 714.2, that the defence had not established that videoconference testimony would be contrary to the principles of fundamental justice, and that the circumstances fell squarely within the legislative intent of section 714.2.

A mid-trial Charter application was brought by the accused, Brook-Lynn Beal-Clark, alleging breaches of her fair trial rights (sections 7 and 11(d)) due to significant failures in court recording equipment, resulting in inaudible audio and indiscernible portions of the trial transcript.

The Crown proposed alternative remedies, including an agreed statement of facts or proceeding without certain evidence, or a mistrial.

The court found that the technological failures compromised the fairness of the trial and the accused's ability to make full answer and defence, determining that a stay of proceedings was the only appropriate remedy in this "clearest of cases."

The offender, Ghislain Desjardins, pleaded guilty to dangerous driving and assaulting a peace officer with a weapon.

The offences involved intentionally driving a vehicle at a police officer and later assaulting another officer during arrest.

The Crown sought a six-month jail sentence, while the defence requested an 8-9 month conditional sentence, emphasizing the offender's rehabilitative efforts.

The court highlighted the seriousness of violence against law enforcement, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence.

Despite significant aggravating factors, including the planned nature of the attack and a criminal record, mitigating factors such as the guilty plea, remorse, abstinence from alcohol, and personal circumstances (loss of partner) were considered.

The court imposed two consecutive six-month conditional sentences of imprisonment, totaling 12 months, followed by two years of probation, a one-year driving prohibition, a DNA order, and a five-year weapons prohibition.

The defendant, Marta Bueno Troncoso, was charged with impaired operation of a conveyance and operating a conveyance with over the legal limit of alcohol.

The court found a breach of her s. 10(b) Charter rights due to an unexplained delay in providing rights to counsel and a failure to facilitate her right to counsel of choice, leading to the exclusion of breath test results under s. 24(2) of the Charter.

The court dismissed claims of s. 8 and s. 10(a) breaches, and found no arbitrary detention under s. 9.

Consequently, the defendant was found not guilty of the over-limit charge.

However, based on civilian and police observations of impairment, the defendant was found guilty of impaired operation, as alcohol was a contributing factor to her impairment, notwithstanding her claim of fatigue.