Justin Guile

The offender was convicted of the first-degree murder of one young woman and the manslaughter of another.

Both victims were vulnerable and their bodies were dismembered and disposed of in a callous manner.

The court imposed the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment with no parole eligibility for 25 years for the murder.

For the manslaughter, the court found extreme aggravating factors, including the complete desecration of the victim's body, and imposed a sentence of 18 years imprisonment to be served concurrently.

The accused was charged with two counts of first-degree murder.

The Crown sought to tender two lengthy videotaped statements given by the accused to police.

A voir dire was held to determine the voluntariness of the statements under the common law confessions rule.

The court analyzed the police conduct, including the use of emotional appeals, discussions of potential deals, and the conditions of the interviews.

The court found that the police did not use oppressive circumstances, impermissible trickery, or prohibited inducements (quid pro quo) that overbore the accused's will.

Both statements were ruled voluntary beyond a reasonable doubt and admissible at trial.

The accused, charged with two counts of first-degree murder, brought multiple Charter applications seeking the exclusion of evidence.

He alleged violations of his s. 10(b) right to counsel regarding initial utterances to police, his s. 9 right against arbitrary detention regarding his arrest for one of the murders, and his s. 8 right against unreasonable search and seizure regarding the forensic re-testing of a seized knife and freezer, as well as the use of a general warrant to obtain Google data.

The court dismissed all applications, finding no Charter breaches.

The court held the accused was not detained prior to his arrest, the police had reasonable and probable grounds for the arrest, no residual privacy interest remained in the lawfully seized physical items, and the general warrant was appropriately issued.