Daniel Rechtshaffen

Three airport workers were convicted by a jury of conspiracy to import and importing 30 kilos of cocaine.

They used their security clearance to facilitate the importation by retrieving a specific cargo container.

The court found their moral culpability exceeded that of mere couriers due to the breach of trust and threat to airport security.

After considering the significant delay in bringing the case to trial and their exemplary conduct on bail, the court sentenced each accused to 11 years' imprisonment.

During a jury trial for importing cocaine, the Crown sought to introduce secondary evidence of lost computer records tracking a cargo container.

The original records had been lost by police and purged by the company.

The court allowed the witness to testify to his recollection of the records under the best evidence rule, finding the loss was in good faith.

However, the court refused to allow a police officer to testify about what the witness told him in 2007, ruling that the defence's cross-examination did not amount to an allegation of recent fabrication that would justify admitting a prior consistent statement.

The accused, charged with sexual assault, brought an application to stay the proceedings for breach of the right to be tried within a reasonable time under s. 11(b) of the Charter.

Applying the pre-Jordan Morin framework, the court found a total delay of thirty-one months, with approximately eight and one-half months attributable to Crown disclosure failures and case management shortcomings, and approximately fourteen and one-half months attributable to institutional delay.

The case was not complex, none of the delay was attributable to the accused, and some prejudice was established, particularly to security interests.

Balancing the accused's Charter interests against the societal interest in a trial on the merits, the court concluded the delay was unreasonable and stayed the proceedings.