Justice R. Maxwell

The Crown applied for an order permitting three Crown witnesses (the complainant and two friends) to testify remotely via video link from their homes in an assault causing bodily harm case.

The witnesses cited health and safety concerns related to the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as travel and cost considerations.

The defence opposed the application, arguing that the witnesses' homes were unsuitable locations and that remote testimony would compromise the accused's right to a fair trial.

The court granted the application, finding that the witnesses had legitimate personal reasons for remote testimony and that appropriate safeguards could maintain trial fairness and the solemnity of proceedings.

The accused was charged with injuring an animal contrary to section 445 of the Criminal Code and wilfully causing unnecessary suffering to an animal contrary to section 445.1 of the Criminal Code.

A small dog named Angel was brought to an emergency veterinary clinic with severe injuries including extensive bruising, internal bleeding, and severe head trauma.

The veterinarians concluded the injuries were consistent with multiple repeated blunt force trauma and could not have been caused by a cat attack as the accused claimed.

The accused had exclusive care of the dog while the owner was away.

The court found the accused guilty on both counts based on circumstantial evidence including his opportunity, his demonstrated frustration with the dog, his false explanation of the injuries, and his failure to seek veterinary care.

The accused was charged with two counts of assault with a weapon and two counts of assault causing bodily harm arising from an incident on July 30, 2016, at Caribana Day in Toronto.

The Crown relied on eyewitness identification evidence from the two victims, forensic evidence of blood on the accused's clothing, and prior identification evidence.

The court found significant frailties and inconsistencies in the eyewitness evidence, including poor memory, intoxication, stress during the incident, and discrepancies between witness accounts and other evidence.

The court determined that the eyewitness identifications were unreliable and that the forensic evidence, while establishing the accused's presence at the scene, did not establish his involvement in the assaults beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused was acquitted on all counts.

The accused pleaded guilty to robbery with a firearm, possession of a loaded prohibited firearm without a licence, possession of a firearm contrary to a prohibition order, and possession for the purpose of trafficking crack cocaine.

The offences occurred during a civic holiday weekend in downtown Toronto when the accused robbed an American tourist at gunpoint near Union Station.

The Crown sought a global sentence of 7 years, while the defence sought 5 years and 2 months with enhanced credit for pre-sentence custody and lockdown conditions.

The court imposed a global sentence of 5 years and 5 months, less pre-sentence custody credit, resulting in a remaining sentence of 4 years and 5 months.

The court also imposed a lifetime firearms prohibition and a DNA order.

The accused was convicted after trial of possession of MDA and methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking, unlawful production of MDA, and unlawful production of methamphetamine for the purpose of trafficking.

Police discovered a clandestine methamphetamine laboratory in the basement of the accused's home, containing 23 kilograms of finished methamphetamine and 3.2 kilograms of MDA with a combined street value between $1.4 and $3.2 million.

The accused, a first-time offender, was sentenced to eight years imprisonment less credit for pre-sentence custody and restrictive bail conditions, resulting in a net sentence of seven years and three months.

Concurrent sentences were imposed on the other counts.

A firearms prohibition order and DNA order were also imposed.