Ms. D. Lafleur

The two accused were found guilty by a jury of human trafficking, procuring, and advertising sexual services.

Augustin was also found guilty of receiving a material benefit from human trafficking and procuring.

The accused exercised significant control over the complainant, forcing her to provide sexual services to numerous men in inhumane conditions and taking all her earnings.

The court sentenced Augustin to 8 years imprisonment (less 11 months credit) and St. Armand to 5 years imprisonment (less 6 months credit), noting the severe impact on the victim and the need for denunciation and deterrence.

The accused, J.A. (K.A.), brought two Charter applications under sections 10(b) (right to counsel) and 8 (unreasonable search or seizure) to exclude evidence in a human trafficking case.

The court found multiple violations of the right to counsel by police officers, including failure to facilitate contact with counsel of choice and failure to hold-off questioning.

However, applying the s. 24(2) Grant factors, the court determined that the evidence (false name, cellular telephone content) should not be excluded, as its admission would not bring the administration of justice into disrepute given the seriousness of the charges and the minimal impact on the accused's Charter interests.

The section 8 application regarding "red boots" was dismissed, as the court found no standing for the accused and no reliable evidence of police search or seizure.

An accused (K.A.) in a human trafficking case sought an adjournment of a section 10(b) Charter application voir dire, citing unpreparedness due to communication difficulties while in custody amidst COVID-19 restrictions.

The Crown and co-accused opposed the request.

The court, balancing the risk of delay against the accused's right to make full answer and defence, reluctantly granted the adjournment to ensure a fair hearing on the important Charter application, which involved potentially inculpatory evidence.