M. Levasseur

The offender pleaded guilty to fraud over $5,000 involving more than 30 victims and losses totalling approximately $285,234 over a four‑year period.

Many victims were seniors who paid for doors, windows, renovation work, or loans that were never delivered or repaid.

The court emphasized that large‑scale fraud is a serious offence where general and specific deterrence and denunciation are paramount.

Aggravating factors included the duration of the scheme, the number and vulnerability of victims, the calculated conduct, and the absence of restitution.

The court imposed a penitentiary sentence of two years and issued a stand‑alone restitution order but declined to impose probation or a DNA order.

The accused brought an application under ss. 276.1 and 276.2 of the Criminal Code seeking permission to cross-examine the complainant about prior sexual assault allegations involving other individuals.

The accused argued the evidence was relevant to demonstrate a pattern of false allegations or a motive to fabricate and was not intended to rely on the prohibited “twin myths.” The court held that the accused failed to provide detailed particulars of the proposed evidence or establish its relevance to an issue at trial.

There was no evidentiary foundation showing the prior allegations were false or recanted, and the proposed evidence would amount to impermissible collateral attacks on credibility.

The court further found that any minimal probative value was substantially outweighed by the risk of prejudice to the complainant and the administration of justice under s. 276(3).

The application was dismissed.