3 total
The defendant was acquitted of aggravated assault as the Crown failed to disprove self-defence beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant was charged with aggravated assault after stabbing the complainant, his cousin, during an altercation.
The defendant claimed self-defence.
The court assessed the credibility of the intoxicated witnesses, noting inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony and his criminal record for assault with a weapon.
Applying the principles of self-defence under section 34 of the Criminal Code, the court found that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not act in self-defence, leading to the dismissal of the charge.
An 18-year-old first-time offender received a 28-month custodial sentence for armed bank robbery.
The defendant, 18 years old at the time of the offences, pleaded guilty to attempt robbery, robbery, use of an imitation firearm, and flight from police.
The offences occurred on January 30 and 31, 2020, in St. Catharines, Ontario.
The defendant and three youths from Toronto and Peel Region arrived in a stolen vehicle to commit the crimes.
The first incident involved an attempted robbery at a Scotia Bank; the second involved a successful robbery of a Bank of Montreal where $1,500 was obtained.
A high-speed chase ensued, during which the stolen vehicle was abandoned and the defendant was apprehended after a physical struggle with police.
The court imposed a sentence of 15 months in custody plus 13 months of pre-sentence custody (totaling 28 months), followed by two years of probation.
The sentence balanced denunciation and deterrence against the defendant's genuine remorse, lack of prior criminal record, and strong prospects for rehabilitation.
Accused acquitted of aggravated assault as Crown failed to prove she aided or abetted.
The accused was charged with break and enter and committing aggravated assault as a party to the offence.
Two men broke into the victim's motel cabin and repeatedly stabbed him.
The accused arrived with the assailants, waited outside the cabin during the attack, and fled with them.
The Crown alleged she acted as a lookout and aided or abetted the crime.
The court found that while the attack was targeted and the accused likely knew of it, mere presence is insufficient for party liability.
The Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused provided actual assistance or encouragement.
The charge was dismissed.
