ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING
— AND —
JOSHUA SANCHEZ-TREJO
Before Justice Patrice F. Band
Reasons for Judgment - September 23, 2022
Mr. A. Gibbons counsel for the Crown
Mr. C. Shortt counsel for the defendant Mr. Joshua Sanchez-Trejo
BAND J.:
I. Introduction
- On Sunday, January 26, 2020, Mr. Sanchez-Trejo was charged with assaulting and forcibly confining Ms. Reneene Musa, with whom he had been spending time that weekend. At the end of a short and straightforward trial, I found Mr. Sanchez-Trejo not guilty with reasons to follow. These are my reasons.
II. Brief Summary of the Evidence
A brief summary of the evidence will put my findings in context.
Mr. Sanchez-Trejo and Ms. Musa met on a dating app and agreed to get together on Friday, January 24. They ended up spending the night together at his house in Etobicoke. On Saturday, they agreed that they would spend the night at the Chelsea Hotel in Toronto. They split the cost of the room and the damage deposit. The room was in Ms. Musa’s name, and Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s contribution was in cash. Things went well until Ms. Musa started feeling ill that evening. Mr. Sanchez-Trejo listened to music on his phone and gave her space. She did not like his music, and that is when things got physical. Both ended up injured.
Ms. Musa explained that she got up to leave, and Mr. Sanchez-Trejo prevented her from doing so. They were “chest to chest”, so she pushed him. She saw his hand swing at her and did not know what happened next. The next thing she knew, she came to on the floor, and noticed she was bleeding from her mouth. She went to the bathroom to clean up and went back to the bed. Mr. Sanchez-Trejo was yelling at her, so she went back to the bathroom and sat on the toilet. He kept yelling at her and leaned into her. He put his hand around her neck with enough pressure to leave a scratch on her neck, so she bit him on the chest, near the nipple. Again, she tried to leave and Mr. Sanchez-Trejo prevented her from doing so. A few minutes later, security knocked on the door and she left. Later, Mr. Sanchez-Trejo sent her text messages in which he apologized to her and also seemed to be threatening her.
According to the security guard, Ms. Musa immediately came out and left with them. She was upset and bleeding from the mouth. Mr. Sanchez-Trejo was in the room as well.
Mr. Sanchez-Trejo testified that Ms. Musa demanded that he turn down his music. She “stormed” toward him and tried to knock the phone out of his hand. Then, she started “chest bumping” him and pushed him. He put his hands in front of his body to protect himself. Her body got through his hands and she bit him near the nipple. He pushed her off and she fell to the floor. Then, he said some degrading things to her about her appearance, including that she had “catfished” him.
At trial, he presented photos of a bite mark near his nipple. He also explained the text messages. He was upset because he felt that he had been good to Ms. Musa who, in turn, he suspected of stealing his phone. She also made off with the entire damage deposit. That and the assault left him feeling like he had been robbed. The apology related to the insulting things he had said to Ms. Musa. The threats surrounding what would happen if she were to come to his house were the result of fears he had, which stemmed from a recent break up. Associates of his former girlfriend had threatened to come shoot at his house, and later made good on that threat.
III. The Issues and Arguments
The central questions of fact in this trial were what happened and who started it. The parties agreed that the analysis in R. v. W.D. applies in this case. Also, the Crown acknowledged that if Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s explanation was not rejected, his claim of self-defence entitled him to an acquittal. In other words, his response was not disproportionate to the assault he says Ms. Musa committed on him.
The Crown relied heavily on the nature of Ms. Musa’s injuries, which were photographed, and text messages that Mr. Sanchez-Trejo sent to her following the incident. They contained an apology and some threatening language. He argued that Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s explanations did not add up and should be rejected.
On behalf of Mr. Sanchez-Trejo, Mr. Shortt submitted that Ms. Musa’s evidence contained important inconsistencies. He also argued that her demeanour at trial – less convivial toward him than Crown counsel – spoke against her credibility. Ultimately, he argued that Mr. Sanchez-Trejo was entitled to be believed. His evidence explained the incident, the content of the text messages, and was not impacted by cross-examination. He had defended himself and was entitled to an acquittal.
IV. Analysis
This was a difficult case for the Crown because Ms. Musa did not really know how she sustained the injuries to her mouth and nose. The Crown bears the burden of proof in this case. Mr. Sanchez-Trejo has nothing to prove. Importantly, Mr. Sanchez-Trejo does not have to explain how Ms. Musa sustained her injuries.
Mr. Sanchez-Trejo and Ms. Musa’s accounts of what happened on Friday and Saturday leading up to the incident were largely consistent, with the exception that Mr. Sanchez-Trejo alleged that she had been consuming alcohol with him, including when she was driving. That dispute is of little consequence.
I did not place any weight on Ms. Musa’s apparent shift in demeanour. There is no doubt that she was injured and it was understandable that she did not appreciate being challenged at trial. Nor was I moved to place any weight on the fact that Ms. Musa had kept the entire damage deposit. She was hardly invited to deliver it to Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s home.
However, one inconsistency was troubling. She testified that Mr. Sanchez-Trejo put his hand to her neck in the bathroom, and that that is when she bit him. Yet, according to her statement to police, that had taken place on the bed, after she had gone to the bathroom to clean herself up. Also telling against her credibility was the fact that the scratch depicted on the photos was on her upper shoulder area, near the collar bone, rather than on her neck as she had testified.
Contrary to the Crown’s submission, this is far from a case in which the approach discussed in R. v. J.J.R.D. 2006 CanLII 40088 (ON CA), [2006] O.J. No. 4749 could apply.
More importantly, I found Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s evidence to be credible. Overall, I believed it. In any event, it certainly left me with a reasonable doubt. There was no additional evidence about Ms. Musa’s injuries, forensic or otherwise, that could cause me to reject Mr. Sanchez-Trejo’s evidence about their provenance. His account was plausible. So, too, was his explanation for the apology and threats contained in the text messages, when understood in context.
For these reasons, Mr. Sanchez-Trejo is entitled to be found not guilty.
Released: September 23, 2022
Justice P.F. Band