Karl Toews

The accused was charged with historical sexual abuse in February 2023.

Following a hung jury and mistrial in October 2025, a retrial was scheduled for June 2026, resulting in a total delay of 40 months.

The accused brought an application under s. 11(b) of the Charter alleging unreasonable delay.

The court found that even after deducting defence delay and the period of the mistrial, the net delay exceeded the 30-month presumptive ceiling.

The court rejected the Crown's argument that the remaining delay was justified by the COVID-19 pandemic backlog, finding that the pandemic's effect had largely dissipated by the time the trial dates were set.

The application was granted and the proceedings were stayed.

This sentencing decision addresses the offence of voyeurism committed by Abinash Samal, who used a disguised spy camera in an Airbnb rental bedroom to secretly record renters engaged in explicit sexual activity.

The Court considered the aggravating factors including the breach of trust, the serious violation of privacy and sexual autonomy, and the retention of videos for prurient use.

The accused pleaded guilty and had no prior record but showed little insight into his offending.

The Court imposed a six-month jail sentence followed by two years probation, rejecting a conditional sentence due to concerns about public safety, the accused’s lack of honesty, and the need for denunciation and deterrence.

The decision also discusses relevant risk assessments and compares similar cases, emphasizing the seriousness of voyeurism in private rental settings.

Bradley Turner, an Uber driver, pleaded guilty to three counts of obtaining sexual services for consideration from persons under 18, contrary to s. 286.1(2) of the Criminal Code.

He propositioned and groomed teenage girls (aged 14-15, though he believed them to be 16-17) for sexual services, sending money and attempting to arrange meetings.

The court considered aggravating factors including the number of victims, age disparity, persistence, attempts at concealment, and the profound harm caused to victims.

Mitigating factors included his guilty plea, lack of criminal history, pro-social history, and a recent diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder.

The court emphasized denunciation and deterrence in child sexual abuse cases, citing R. v. Friesen and R. v. Alcorn.

Despite mitigating factors, the court found a significant custodial sentence necessary.

The accused brought a directed verdict motion arguing that the presumption of accuracy under s. 320.31 of the Criminal Code could not apply because there was no express evidence from an analyst regarding the target value of the alcohol standard used in the calibration check.

The court dismissed the motion, finding that the breath technician's evidence of her expected target value based on her training, combined with the analyst's certificate stating the standard was suitable for use, was sufficient evidence for a trier of fact to apply the presumption.

The applicant brought a directed verdict motion on two grounds: first, challenging the applicability of the prior section 258 presumption of identity (the Shaikh argument), and second, challenging whether the new section 320.31 presumption of accuracy could apply to the facts (the Flores-Vigil argument).

The court dismissed the application in whole.

The court found that there was sufficient evidence from which a trier of fact could apply the new presumption of accuracy under section 320.31, as the breath technician was trained and qualified, the alcohol standard was certified by an analyst as suitable for use, and the technician's knowledge of the target value was part of her training.

The court reserved written reasons on the Shaikh point.

The accused, charged with impaired driving by drug, brought a pre-trial application seeking disclosure of the evaluating officer's 'rolling logs'.

The defence relied on the Court of Appeal's decision in Stipo, which held that rolling logs were obviously relevant for disclosure.

The Crown argued that recent amendments to the Criminal Code prohibited such disclosure and that expert evidence demonstrated the logs were irrelevant.

The court heard expert testimony explaining that nonalignment between an officer's opinion and toxicology results does not indicate an unreliable evaluation due to various scientific factors.

The court concluded the rolling logs were not relevant to assessing the officer's evidence and that section 320.36 of the Criminal Code prohibits the disclosure of testing results related to other individuals.

The application for disclosure was dismissed.

The accused pleaded guilty to importing approximately 959 grams of cocaine into Canada, contrary to section 6(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

The sentencing court was required to balance the extremely serious nature of cocaine importation with the unique circumstances of the Aboriginal offender, including his traumatic childhood marked by parental alcoholism and violence, his lifelong struggle with substance abuse, and his limited connection to his Aboriginal heritage.

The court applied the principles established in Gladue and Ipeelee, recognizing that while the offence was serious, the offender's level of culpability was sufficiently diminished by his Aboriginal background and circumstances to justify a sentence below the ordinary range of three to five years imprisonment.