Jennifer Joanne Epstein

The appellant appealed his conviction for assault entered by the Ontario Court of Justice.

The Crown's key witness, Bonney, gave inconsistent testimony throughout the trial.

The trial judge permitted the Crown to cross-examine Bonney on a prior statement to police under section 9 of the Canada Evidence Act after finding him adverse.

The appellant challenged the propriety of the Crown's re-examination and the trial judge's acceptance of Bonney's initial testimony.

The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, finding the re-examination was appropriate and the trial judge properly assessed the evidence.

The conviction on assault with a weapon was stayed pursuant to the Kienapple principle.

Joane LaPrise sought to quash her committal to stand trial on charges of fraud over $5,000, money laundering, and possession of proceeds of crime, following a preliminary inquiry.

The application focused on whether there was any evidence that the accused knew or was wilfully blind to the fraudulent enterprise.

The court reviewed the evidence, including the accused's senior role in the companies, her involvement in suspicious financial practices, and her knowledge of misleading information provided to investors.

The court concluded that there was sufficient evidence for a reasonable jury to find knowledge or wilful blindness, and therefore rejected the application to quash the committal.