Krystal Bodil Myge

The defendant, Isaac Kalejaiye, was found guilty after trial of dangerous operation of a conveyance.

This decision outlines the reasons for his sentence.

The court considered aggravating factors, including the intentional nature of his dangerous driving (road rage) which caused significant, lasting injuries to multiple victims, and his extensive criminal and driving record.

Mitigating factors included his mental health issues and proactive steps towards rehabilitation.

The court rejected both the defence's request for an absolute discharge and the Crown's proposed conditional sentence as too lenient, emphasizing denunciation and deterrence.

A period of incarceration and a significant driving prohibition were deemed necessary to reflect the gravity of the offence and the offender's culpability.

The accused, Attaul Raheem Ahmad, was charged with assault causing bodily harm and assault with a weapon against his mother.

The mother testified for the Crown, describing a violent, prolonged beating.

The accused testified in his own defence, offering inconsistent explanations for his mother's extensive injuries, including speculative falls.

The court found the mother's testimony consistent and corroborated by photographic evidence of her severe bruising, while rejecting the accused's unreliable and changing account.

The court found the Crown proved both charges beyond a reasonable doubt.

The accused, Jules Meawasige, pleaded guilty to a serious charge, leading to a sentencing hearing.

The court accepted a joint submission for a 40-month sentence, acknowledging the accused's acceptance of responsibility and the saving of court time as significant mitigating factors.

The judgment detailed the calculation of pre-sentence custody credit, including specific consideration for lockdown days and COVID-19 impacts.

Various ancillary orders were imposed, including a 20-year SOIRA order, a lifetime weapons prohibition, a DNA order, and a no-communication order.

A three-year probation period was also imposed, with conditions focused on rehabilitation, particularly addressing alcohol abuse and sexual behaviours.

The Crown brought an application for direction regarding the scope of a preliminary inquiry where an Information contains both offences with a maximum penalty of 14 years or more (14+ offences) and offences with a maximum penalty of less than 14 years (<14 offences).

Following amendments to the Criminal Code that came into force on September 19, 2019, defendants can only request preliminary inquiries for 14+ offences.

The court determined that a preliminary inquiry judge has jurisdiction only over the 14+ offences and must remit the <14 offences to the Superior Court, regardless of the outcome of the preliminary inquiry on the 14+ offences.