K. Miles

The applicant, charged with drug trafficking and failure to comply offences, applied for a bail review under s. 525 of the Criminal Code after spending over a year in pre-trial custody.

The court found that the applicant's continued detention was no longer justified under the primary, secondary, or tertiary grounds, noting the unreasonable delay in bringing the review, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on custodial conditions, and the applicant's acceptance into a bail supervision program.

The application was granted and the applicant was released on strict conditions without a surety.

Following a judge-alone trial on historical sexual offence charges involving two complainants, the court first addressed the admissibility of one complainant’s police statement and preliminary hearing testimony after she refused to complete cross-examination due to acute psychological distress.

Applying the principled hearsay exception and authorities dealing with unresponsive complainants, the court admitted the prior statements to preserve trial fairness and permit assessment of credibility through prior inconsistent accounts.

On the merits, the court found both complainants’ evidence contained significant and material inconsistencies going to the heart of the allegations.

The Crown failed to prove any count beyond a reasonable doubt, and the accused was acquitted on all six charges.

The offender was convicted by a jury of unlawful act manslaughter for the shooting death of his wife during a struggle over a loaded handgun.

The Crown sought 7 to 8 years imprisonment, while the defence sought a sentence of time served.

The court found the offender's moral blameworthiness to be at the higher end of the spectrum due to the domestic context and the introduction of a loaded firearm into a volatile situation.

The court imposed a global sentence of 7 years imprisonment, less enhanced pre-sentence custody credit at a 1.5:1 ratio, resulting in a net sentence of 2 years, 5 months, and 23 days.

The Crown applied to admit the ante mortem statements of the deceased in a first-degree murder trial.

The deceased had made statements to friends and family about the breakdown of her marriage and her husband's resulting anger and behaviour.

The court held that the statements were admissible under both the traditional state of mind exception and the principled approach to hearsay, as they were relevant to animus and motive, and met the threshold for reliability.

On a Crown bail review, the court considered whether a Justice of the Peace erred in releasing the respondent on a reverse-onus basis on charges including sexual assault, unlawful confinement, and breach of recognizance.

The court held that the proposed surety plan did not amount to true 24/7 house arrest, contained material supervision gaps, and failed to adequately address public and complainant safety.

The court further found inadequate consideration of the respondent's prior breach record, evidence of additional breaches, and the strength of the Crown's case on the current breach allegation.

Tertiary grounds were rejected, but detention was ordered on secondary grounds and the release order was vacated.