Michael Lockner

The accused was tried for possession of stolen property after attempting to sell a gold bar that was allegedly the proceeds of a fraud.

The Crown's case relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including cell phone tower data and the accused's familial and business connections to the perpetrators of the fraud.

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that the gold was obtained by crime.

However, the court was left with a reasonable doubt regarding whether the accused had actual knowledge of the fraud or was wilfully blind to it, citing issues with the reliability of key witness testimony.

The charge was dismissed.

The Crown sought to introduce similar fact evidence between two separate sexual assault allegations involving different complainants.

The Crown argued that similarities between the incidents demonstrated that the accused administered a drug to each complainant to facilitate sexual assault and supported credibility findings.

The court reviewed the governing test for similar fact evidence, including the requirement that its probative value outweigh its prejudicial effect and that the similarities render coincidence objectively improbable.

Despite some overlapping circumstances, the court found significant differences between the incidents, including the nature of the relationships, the circumstances of the encounters, the symptoms described, and an eight‑year gap between the events.

The court concluded the similarities were not sufficiently distinctive to overcome the highly prejudicial effect of the proposed evidence.

The two accused were charged with drugging and sexually assaulting two different complainants.

The first complainant alleged she was drugged and assaulted by one of the accused in 2003, but the court found reasonable doubt due to inconsistencies in the timeline and lack of corroborating evidence.

The second complainant alleged she was drugged and assaulted by both accused in 2011 after a night of heavy drinking.

The court found reasonable doubt that she was drugged, noting her ability to walk and send text messages during the alleged timeframe.

The court also found reasonable doubt regarding her lack of consent, or alternatively, that the accused had an honest but mistaken belief in her consent.

Both accused were found not guilty on all charges.

The offender pleaded guilty to aggravated assault and failing to comply with his recognizance after stabbing a stranger in the neck at a public library.

The offender, who was homeless and suffered from schizophrenia, attacked the victim without provocation.

The court weighed the severe injuries to the victim and the unprovoked nature of the attack against the offender's youth, lack of prior record, guilty plea, and mental health issues.

The court sentenced the offender to 6 years in custody, less 2 years credit for pre-sentence custody.