ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING
— AND —
ALAIN LUNDI
Before Justice T. Lipson
Reasons for Judgment released on July 25. 2025
Ms. T. Bobrovitz counsel for the Crown
Mr. J. Danto-Clancy counsel for Alain Lundi
Lipson J.:
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
Overview of the Allegations
1Alain Lundi entered a plea of not guilty to each count of a twenty-count information before the court. Most of the counts allege acts of assaultive behaviour or threats by Mr. Lundi against his former intimate partner, Sabrina Oliveira, between July 15-16, 2023.
2According to Ms. Oliveira, she and Mr. Lundi began an intimate relationship in the fall of 2022. On July 15, 2023, Ms. Oliveira met Mr. Lundi at his residence in the late afternoon. He had been drinking and the two argued. They then drove to the Byward Market where they left Ms. Oliveira's car at the multi-level parking garage on Clarence Street. They went for dinner where Ms. Oliveira had 1-2 glasses of white wine. Ms. Oliveira remembered that Mr. Lundi drank alcohol but was uncertain as to the amount . From there, the two took an Uber to the Andaz hotel. They each had a shot of hard alcohol there. In his testimony, Mr. Lundi denied they went to that hotel.
3The two then took an Uber to Mooney’s Bay to attend a volleyball tournament and party. Ms. Oliveira said something during the Uber ride which upset Mr. Lundi. She recalled showing him a video online and made a joke like “Oh I am dangerous”. Mr. Lundi told the court that Ms. Oliveira showed him an article about someone in jail in Toronto and said “Yo, I framed him. I am dangerous . I know how to work the system, I did it with my baby daddies”. Mr. Lundi testified that her comments made him fearful and uneasy being with Ms. Oliveira.
4At the volleyball tournament, Mr. Lundi pulled Ms. Oliveira aside to have a one-on-one discussion. They exchanged unpleasantries about her knowing the bouncer. Inside the party Ms. Oliveira had one drink of hard alcohol and juice. She saw Mr. Lundi drinking with his friends. They both left around 7:00 pm.
5The two then went to a residence on Rowallen Place where Bianca, a friend of Mr. Lundi, was hosting a party. Two friends, Jordan Shaker his girlfriend Pascale Brisson also rode with the couple to the party in Ms. Brisson’s car while Mr. Lundi drove.
6Ms. Oliveira testified that some of the guests were drinking at the party. She had the impression that some of the people were using drugs, including cocaine, and commented on this to Mr. Lundi. He asked to her go outside and talk on the front porch. Mr. Lundi was angered by her comments. Ms. Oliveira said that he slapped her very firmly on her left leg above her knee. Mr. Lundi denied the assault, claiming he only took his cell phone from Ms. Oliveira's leg. They then went back inside the house for a few minutes. Ms. Oliveira told others at the party that the accused had assaulted her. Mr. Lundi then asked her to go out to the porch a second time. He was very upset and asked her why she was embarrassing him. Ms. Oliveira said that the accused told her to sit down, and he hit her on her right leg above her knee. Ms. Oliveira got up and ran inside the house and then to the backyard where she told people about the incident. In testimony, Mr. Lundi denied bringing her to the porch a second time. (Counts 1 and 18).
7Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi then took her to Pascale Brisson’s car. He was furious, telling her he needed to talk to her and that he was upset she was lying. The accused forced her into the back seat. He was in an enraged state and was yelling at her. Ms. Oliveira claimed that Mr. Lundi choked her using two hands. He put his hands around her neck with such force that she was unable to breathe. Ms. Oliveira was on the seat while Mr. Lundi was straddling her. He was telling her to “go apologize”. Mr. Lundi stopped because Pascale, the girl who owned the car, came out and said, “you’re not doing this in my car.” Mr. Lundi denied that this incident occurred. (Count 19)
8Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi then forced her to go to Firefly Park, located a short walk from the Rowallen house party. He dragged her into a corner of the park “under a bush and a tree”. Mr. Lundi was telling her “We need to talk; we need to settle this.” She told the court that Mr. Lundi struck her on her right side repeatedly and yelled at her. She also recalled being on her knees and that the accused strangled her. He had both of his hands around her neck. Ms. Oliveira said that at one point, she was on her stomach, and he was kicking her legs. She said that he hit her all over- her legs, her calves and all the way up to her hip and lower back. Ms. Oliveira also testified to threats made by the accused in the park. In his testimony, Mr. Lundi denied that any of this happened. (Counts 2, 11, 14)
9Ms. Oliveira said that after the incident in Firefly Park, Mr. Lundi called an Uber. While waiting for the Uber, he hit her on her left hand very hard and punched her on the left side of her head. Ms. Oliveira said that an Uber arrived, and she got in with Mr. Lundi because he had assaulted and threatened her, telling her that she had no choice. Mr. Lundi’s friends who had been at the party had already gone downtown, and he directed the Uber driver to go downtown. Ms. Oliveira testified that during the ride, Mr. Lundi told her in French at least seven times that he was going to kill her. Mr. Lundi denied threatening Ms. Oliveira. Ms. Oliveira testified that during the ride he applied pressure by squeezing her thigh/hip area with his right hand. He was turned towards her, talking in her right ear. (Counts 3, 4 and 5)
10Around midnight, the Uber dropped the couple off at the parking garage on Clarence Street in the Byward Market area of Ottawa. They took the elevator to the third floor. Ms. Oliveira told Mr. Lundi that she had to urinate and testified that the accused directed her to relieve herself in the elevator. She testified that Mr. Lundi grabbed her by the throat in the elevator and pushed her up against the elevator wall. He told her that she “better go apologize to my friends. You’re not going home. I don’t give a fuck. You’re coming with me right now”. Ms. Oliveira testified that while on Level 4, he choked her and started kissing her. At one point, the accused got down on his knees. According to Ms. Oliveira, he told her he loved her and but also that he was going to kill her. Mr. Lundi claimed he was on his knees begging Ms. Oliveira to go home. (Counts 6 and 20)
11Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi then forced her to walk up the stairs to the fifth floor of the parking garage and then sat her on the ground. He then picked her up and sat her on the railing. Ms. Oliveira said she felt unsafe and was fighting to get down. She testified that Mr. Lundi said, “I’m going to fucking kill you, I’m going to kill you.” (Count 7)
12Ms. Oliveira was able to get away and leave the parking garage. She went bar called JTM because she knew people there and felt she would be safe. Mr. Lundi followed her into the restaurant and would not leave her alone. Ms. Oliveira called her mother, Bertilde Santos, to pick her up. Ms. Oliveira said that while at the bar, Mr. Lundi stomped on her foot. She was wearing flip-flops at the time. He also took her phone. The Crown alleges that the accused committed mischief by taking her phone and answered a call from her mother Bertilde Santos that was intended for her. He would not let her speak to her mother but gave the phone back after the call. In his evidence, Mr. Lundi denied that these incidents occurred. (Counts 8 and 16).
13During the car ride back to the residence of Ms. Santos, Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi was enraged. He was screaming at them and acting in a threatening manner. Ms. Oliveira alleged that he was making threats against her and her family. Mr. Lundi denied uttering any threats. (Count 9).
14Ms. Oliveira testified that after arriving at her residence on Grammond Circle, Mr. Lundi pushed her mother in the foyer and stepped over her as he made his way inside. Mr. Lundi denied pushing Ms. Santos. Count 12 alleges that Mr. Lundi also pushed Ms. Oliveira’s daughter Malia. Mr. Lundi denied this. (Counts 10 and 12).
15Ms. Oliveira testified that the accused was screaming and yelling. He was banging so hard on a door in the garage that he damaged it. Also, it is alleged that Mr. Lundi’s behaviour at the residence was so loud that he committed mischief by interfering with the neighbours’ enjoyment of property (Counts 13 and 17).
16Ms. Oliveira testified that while at her residence, Mr. Lundi stole her purse. Mr. Lundi said that he was trying to retrieve his credit cards which were in the purse. (Count 15).
Applicable Legal Principles
17The court is required to apply the following legal principles.
18Mr. Lundi is presumed to be innocent of the charges against him. This presumption continues unless and until the Crown has proven his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Lundi was under no obligation to testify during the trial. He does not have to prove anything, including his innocence.
19The burden of proof rests on the Crown alone. The Crown must prove the offences beyond a reasonable doubt. This standard of proof means that the Court must not convict Mr. Lundi if he is probably guilty or likely guilty. Reasonable doubt falls much closer to absolute certainty than to proof on a balance of probabilities. However, reasonable doubt does not require proof to an absolute certainty. That would be nearly impossible: R. v Lifchus,[1977] S.C.J. No. 77.
20The credibility of the witnesses is an important issue in this case. Mr. Lundi testified in his own defence. I am guided by the following analytic framework in R. v W(D), 1991 CanLII 93 (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742 for the assessment of the accused’s testimony. First, if I believe the evidence of the accused, I must acquit. Secondly, if I do not believe the testimony of the accused, but am left in reasonable doubt by it, I must acquit. Thirdly, even if I am not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, I must ask my self whether, on the basis of the evidence I do accept, I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by the evidence of the guilt of the accused.
21It is important to remember that a criminal trial is not a credibility contest. It is a trial to determine whether the Crown has proved the guilt of the accused on the specific charges beyond a reasonable doubt. It is, therefore, wrong to decide a criminal case where there is conflicting evidence about whether the accused is guilty, simply by deciding which version of events is preferred. Mere disbelief of the evidence offered by the accused to show his innocence should not be treated as proof of the guilt of the accused. The evidence must be considered as a whole. It is also the case, as stated by Doherty J.A. in R. v. D (JJ R) (2006) 2006 CanLII 40088 (ON CA), 215 C.C.C. (3rd) 252 9C.A.) that an outright rejection of an accused’s evidence based on a considered and reasoned acceptance beyond a reasonable doubt of the truth of the conflicting evidence is as much an explanation for the rejection of an accused’s evidence as is a rejection based on a problem identified with the way the accused testified.
22In this case, there are counts which allege assaults on Ms. Oliveira by choking, suffocating, or strangling. The unreported decision of R. v. A.K. ,dated June 23, 2023, provides a useful summary of the case law regarding the essential elements of the offence. In summary, the Crown need not prove an actual interference with a victim’s ability to breathe to make out the offence.
Analysis
23I will first address the most serious allegations against Mr. Lundi. They arise out of the incidents said to have occurred in Firefly Park and the Byward Market Parking Garage.
Firefly Park Incident: Count 2: Assault by Choking; Count 14: Assault; Count 11: Utter Threats
24There is no dispute that by the time they arrived at the Rowallen house party, Mr. Lundi had become increasingly upset and angry with Ms. Oliveira. During the Uber ride to the volleyball event at Mooney’s Bay, she played him a video and said jokingly, “Oh I am dangerous”. In his evidence, Mr. Lundi said that she showed him an article about someone in jail in Toronto and said “Yo I framed him. I am dangerous. I know how to work the system. I did it with my baby daddies.” At the volleyball tournament, Mr. Lundi was irritated that Ms. Oliveira knew one of the bouncers who had let them into the event. Then at the house party on Rowallen, Mr. Lundi became very upset with Ms. Oliveira when she asked whether people were using drugs. He took her to the porch where Ms. Oliveira claimed he assaulted her two separate times by slapping her on her thighs. When she complained to his friends about the assault, Mr. Lundi became angrier.
25Mr. Lundi denied assaulting the complainant. He told the court that she was jealous that he was texting with another woman and that they went to the porch because Ms. Oliveira wanted to inspect his phone. Ms. Oliveira said that the accused was furious and that he led her against her will to Pascale’s car where he assaulted her again. He was interrupted by Pascale who told them to get out of her car. Mr. Lundi denied that this incident in Pascale’s car took place. Ms. Oliveira said she complied with the accused’s demand to apologize to his friends for accusing him of assaulting her and told them it was a lie. She told Mr. Lundi that she loved him and that she was sorry. She did this, she said, out of fear.
26Ms. Oliveira said that Mr. Lundi then forced her to go into Firefly Park, dragging her into a corner of the park under a bush and tree. He took her arm and told her “We need to settle this.” According to Ms. Oliveira, the accused struck her repeatedly. She recalled being on her stomach the ground as she was being kicked on her right side. She testified that he hit her all over her legs, hips, and calves, “all the way to her hip and lower back”. At one point, the accused told her to go on her knees. She did so and he strangled her. Ms. Oliveira said she felt like she was going to pass out. She was extremely dizzy and nauseous. While she was on the ground, Ms. Oliveira heard the voice of a girl that was coming from a window of a nearby house telling Mr. Lundi to stop. The two then left the park and walked back to the house on Rowallen.
27The person calling from the window was Kaylee McFarlane. At the time of the incident, she was a 21-year-old university student residing with her parents on Rowallen Place. Ms. McFarlane said that her bedroom window “looks out right onto the park”. At approximately 10:30 p.m. she was going to bed when she heard voices in the park. It was dark out but there was light from a lamppost in the middle of the park. She saw a male and a woman. She told the court that there was sufficient light to see the positions of their bodies. The man was swearing at the woman. He called her Sabrina. Ms. McFarlane heard slapping noises and the woman responding in pain. She testified she could make out the slapping motions. The male appeared to be pulling his arm back in a winding motion and then releasing it as he slapped the woman. She never witnessed the woman slapping the man. Ms. McFarlane saw the man winding up to slap the woman 4-5 times, however she heard the slapping noise approximately 7-10 times.
28Ms. McFarlane heard the woman pleading with the man. She heard the woman say “okay baby” repeatedly as she was getting hit. Later in the incident, the woman was saying “my neck” and “my kids”. Ms. McFarlane said “that is when it became more of a reality for me that this was more than just like a passer-by in the park. This was a big incident . Like this was - this was a crime”. She thought the whole incident lasted three minutes. She heard the woman saying, “my neck” and “my kids” closer to the end. The slapping became more repetitive and then towards the end she heard the woman pleading “baby, my neck, my neck.” And there was no noise that followed.
29Ms. McFarlane yelled out her window for the man to stop and that she was going to call the police. The man yelled back and said something like “no you won’t.” Ms. McFarlane responded that she would and told him she was calling the police.
30Ms. McFarlane took videos of the incident which were filed as Exhibit 1. She testified that no other people entered the park. At the conclusion of the incident, she saw a second woman enter the entranceway of the park. This occurred after the man was hitting the woman.
31In cross examination, Ms. McFarlane did not hear anybody threatening to kill anyone in the park. The police arrived about 10 minutes after call. She reiterated that she saw the man slapping the woman. She could not say specifically what part of her body he was hitting, but she did see him hitting her.
32Exhibit 1 comprises two short videos taken by Kayley McFarlane during the incident. The first is 17 seconds in length. It is not possible to see what is happening, but one can hear loud slapping sounds which the Crown asserts is Mr. Lundi assaulting Ms. Oliveira. She is heard saying “I promise baby”, “okay baby”. At the end of the video, she says “my neck” to which the accused responds, “I know”. The second video is 30 seconds long. Mr. Lundi is heard saying, “don’t fuck with me” and “I swear to God, you better tell me exactly what you said. The complainant says “I promise baby” while the sound of slapping occurs in the background. Mr. Lundi then says something about “fucking shaming him”. Mr. Lundi then demands that she get on her knees. Ms. Oliveira responds, “my neck, okay- just don’t hurt my neck” and please my kids need me. Please, my kids.” The accused responds, “ya, I need you too” and “promise me you will never do that shit.”
33The Crown introduced injury photos of Ms. Oliveira in exhibits 9 and 10. They depict extensive bruising to her lower body, particularly her right leg.
34In his testimony, Mr. Lundi positively identified his voice and Ms. Oliveira's voice in the videos. However, he also testified that he did not remember being in Firefly Park. For clarification purposes, the court asked him whether he was saying he was not in the park or that he did not recall being in the park. Mr. Lundi responded, “I wasn’t in the park, no. No, I recall being outside with Sabrina waiting for the Uber and it’s all near the park, so I -I can’t say we were inside the park. Mr. Lundi said he did not remember the conversation with Ms. Oliveira in the park. However, he was certain that the slapping noise heard in the video was him smacking the back of his hand against his other hand. Mr. Lundi said in chief that he had no recollection of the complainant saying, “my neck, my neck.” When asked in chief about his reaction to the video evidence, he said, “it is evident to me that I was frustrated and smacking my hands like what I do when I’m frustrated but I don’t recall the full extent of our interactions”. Mr. Lundi was referring to video evidence from the parking garage on Clarence Street where he is seen slapping the back of his hand against the palm of his other hand.
35When asked in cross-examination about what occurred in the park, he testified that he did not recall the conversation with Ms. Oliveira because it had been over a year and half. Yet, he also agreed that during that conversation, he was demanding to know what she had told others at the party about him. He agreed that he was upset that Sabrina had told people at the party that he had assaulted her. In cross-examination, the Crown suggested that he put his hands around Ms. Oliveira's neck when she was on her knees in the park at the time she was saying “my neck, my neck”. He said he could not recall such an interaction. When the video was replayed for him, he disagreed that he was assaulting the complainant. He said it was “impossible” that he placed his hands around her neck and choked her.
36The Crown submits that the evidence of Ms. Oliveira that she was assaulted in Firefly Park is credible and reliable. Her evidence is supported by the injury photos of extensive bruising to her right side which is consistent with being kicked and struck as she described in her evidence. Further, it is submitted that the evidence of Ms. McFarlane and the videos she took provide strong confirmation that Ms. Oliveira was the victim of a prolonged assault in the park. It was submitted that the accused’s testimony that he was not in the park or could not recall being in the park was false. It should not raise any reasonable doubt and should be rejected.
37The defence submits that Ms. Oliveira was not a credible or reliable witness. She could not recall whether she had been kicked in the head which is not believable. There is no evidence that she had dirt or grass stains on her clothing or body even though she was allegedly attacked in the park while either on the ground or on her knees. Defence witnesses, Jordan Shaker and Nicole Dulanto, testified that they did not see grass or dirt on Ms. Oliveira at the Rowallen party, Nicole testified that she inspected Ms. Oliveira's neck with a flashlight for injuries and saw none. Ms. Oliveira is not heard being interrupted by slaps while she is speaking on the video at the park. This supports Mr. Lundi’s evidence that he was not assaulting Ms. Oliveira. Instead, this evidence supports the notion that Mr. Lundi was pacing and slapping his hands together as he is seen doing in the parking garage video. The defence also relies on Nicole’s evidence that Mr. Lundi would not accept a ride with her and Gerard because he wanted to stay with Ms. Oliveira out of concern for her well-being.
38I do not believe Mr. Lundi’s evidence that he wasn’t in the park or, in the alternative, was unable to remember being in the park with Ms. Oliveira. I find that Mr. Lundi was in the park. That is established by the evidence of Ms. Oliveira, Ms. McFarlane and the videos taken by Ms. McFarlane. The evidence of Jordan Shaker and other defence witnesses that Ms. Oliveira and Mr. Lundi were always in their view and present inside or outside the house is demonstrably unreliable. Mr. Lundi and Ms. Oliveira clearly did leave the party. I believe Ms. Oliveira that the accused led her into Firefly Park. Even when Mr. Lundi was played the video of him and Ms. Oliveira in the park, he was incapable of conceding the obvious.
39I found Mr. Lundi to be evasive when he claimed he couldn’t remember any interaction in a park with Ms. Oliveira. He was not being truthful. I reject his denial that he heard anyone told him to stop his actions in the park as testified to by Ms. McFarlane and Ms. Oliveira. If Mr. Lundi was having a confrontation in Firefly Park and was interrupted by a stranger threatening to call the police, he would surely have recalled the incident. Even though he could not remember the event, he was able to say that he was making a clapping noise with his hands and not assaulting Ms. Oliveira. Even though he could not remember the incident, he maintained that it was impossible that he was putting his hands around her neck. His testimony was inconsistent and lacked credibility. I do not believe him nor does his testimony leave the court in reasonable doubt that he assaulted Ms. Oliveira as she described.
40Ms. Oliveira's testimony was supported by the evidence of Kayley McFarlane, an independent witness who observed and recorded the incident in Firefly Park. Ms. McFarlane’s testimony and videos corroborate Ms. Oliveira's account of being assaulted and choked by Mr. Lundi. Her injuries, as documented in photographs taken by the Ottawa Police, are consistent with Ms. Oliveira’s testimony and the video evidence. The extensive bruising and marks on her body align with the assaults she described.
41I accept Ms. Oliveira's testimony that Mr. Lundi kicked her on her right side while she was on the ground. I am satisfied that the extensive bruising to her right side, depicted in the injury photographs resulted from kicks and strikes delivered by the accused. I accept the testimony of Ms. McFarlane who witnessed the assault. She heard the complainant respond in pain when she was hit. I accept her testimony that she could make out the slapping motion and in court described the man winding up to slap the woman. She testified that it looked like he was pulling his arm back and releasing it. Ms. McFarlane had a good vantage point. She estimated that the distance from her window to the ground was only 15-20 metres. I believe Ms. McFarlane’s testimony that the slapping became more repetitive and that towards the end of the incident, she heard the woman pleading “baby, my neck, my neck”. Ms. McFarlane observed that at one point the woman was on her knees. I accept the testimony of Ms. Oliveira that during this incident the accused held her by the neck and was applying pressure, to the point that she was unable to speak. I also note the evidence of Ms. Oliveira that prior to testifying, she had never seen the videos recorded by Ms. McFarlane. She is heard apologizing to the accused and then said, “ow, my neck”. I note also that Ms. Oliveira had a previous neck injury which still caused her discomfort. She testified that Mr. Lundi was aware of this on July 15-16.
42The Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi is guilty of assault by choking as alleged in count 2 and count 14 assault.
43I am not satisfied that the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi is guilty of uttering death threats in Firefly Park. Ms. Oliveira testified she felt threatened during the incident. I believe her. She was attacked in the park. However, there is no evidence from Ms. Oliveira, Ms. McFarlane, or the video evidence that Mr. Lundi made overt threats during the incident. Count 11 is, therefore, dismissed.
Byward Market Parking Garage Incidents: Count 6: Forcible Confinement; Count 20: Assault by choking; Count 7: Utter Threats
44An Uber dropped off Mr. Lundi and Ms. Oliveira at the multi-level parking garage on Clarence Street in Byward Market where she had parked her car earlier in the day. Ms. Oliveira estimated that they returned to the garage close to midnight.
45Ms. Oliveira testified that she became apprehensive when the accused told her he wanted to speak to her in the garage. She told him she had to urinate, hoping for a chance to get away from Mr. Lundi. He told her to relieve herself in the parking garage elevator. Ms. Oliveira said she forced herself to urinate in the elevator.
46Ms. Oliveira testified that in the elevator, Mr. Lundi grabbed her by the throat with both of his hands. He pushed her up against the elevator wall. He told her “You better go apologize to my friends. You’re not going home. I don’t give a fuck. You’re coming with me right now.” He told her that because of what she did, he was going to pick up another girl and she could not say anything about it. Ms. Oliveira believed he was referring to her telling people at the party that he had assaulted her. She recalled that after getting out of the elevator, he choked her and trying to kiss her. At one point, Mr. Lundi also got on his knees and said, “I love you” and then “I’m going to kill you”.
47Ms. Oliveira testified that the accused forced her to then walk up the stairs to the top floor and had her sit on the ground. He said “Sit the fuck down. Get up here now. I’m not done with you. You’re going to pay.” He picked her up and sat her on the railing. She was fighting to get off the railing . She testified that Mr. Lundi said “I’m going to jail tonight . I don’t give a fuck. I’m going to kill you. I’m going to kill you.” She believed that he was going to kill her by dropping her over the railing. She pointed out in Exhibit 4 page 14 where the accused made her sit down and where he picked her up and placed her on the railing.
48Ms. Oliveira testified that she fought him “with everything in me”. She was dropping her weight so he could not pick her up. She was screaming her children’s names and telling him she loved him. After a few moments he allowed her to stand on the ground and she ran away. He responded by telling her, "You fucking tricked me”.
49The videos, marked as Exhibit 3, were played in court during Ms. Oliveira's examination in chief. She had not seen these videos prior to trial. The first video shows the two on Level 3. Ms. Oliveira follows Mr. Lundi into the elevator. She testified earlier that she had told him she needed to urinate. When they came out of the elevator, she is seen pulling her dress down. She described them being on Level 4 of the garage when Mr. Lundi was choking her and trying to kiss her. The next video in Exhibit 3 shows the accused choking Ms. Oliveira four separate times. The video also shows the accused on his knees. Mr. Lundi said he was begging her to go home. Ms. Oliveira said he was on his knees saying, “I love you” and then “I'm going to kill you”.
50Mr. Lundi testified that he and Ms. Oliveira went back to the parking garage because he wanted to drive her home. They took the elevator. Ms. Oliveira did not want to leave and that he was trying to reassure her because she said she didn’t want him meet girls that night. He testified that he panicked and was frustrated with the situation. He simply wanted her to cooperate. When asked about what happened in the garage, Mr. Lundi said “ it’s a moment I'm not proud of”. He explained that he was very frustrated and was “trying to talk sense to her. I begged her. Like I was on my knees I said can you just please cooperate, like I’m trying to get you home”. He said that he kissed her, and she kissed him”. He said that he ran out of patience. The accused said that the video “brought that memory to me that I didn’t even recall happened at the time, to be honest. The video caused him to realize that “we had a toxic interaction in the parking lot.”
51In cross-examination, Mr. Lundi said that he did recall the incident and had forgotten the “full context of” the dialogue he was having with Ms. Oliveira”. It should be noted there was no audio with the video. He testified that he did not recall climbing up the stairwell in the parking lot, yet he was sure that Ms. Oliveira's description of what he said and allegedly did to her with respect to the railing incident was fabricated.
52The defence tendered Exhibit 17 which is a video taken by Mr. Lundi on in the stairwell at Level 4 of the Parkade. She promises the accused to not leave his side. She says, “ I promise I will not fuck you over, I swear to God, just please calm down”. Ms. Oliveira looks fearful and in a dishevelled state. There is a red mark on her right thigh.
53The Crown submits the video surveillance evidence speaks for itself. Exhibit 3, video clip “Level 4”, captures Mr. Lundi placing his hands around Ms. Oliveira’s neck four separate times. He is seen to apply force to her in a violent manner and continues to do so despite her evident fear and lack of consent. Ms. Oliveira also described being assaulted in a similar manner in the elevator, which is not captured on surveillance video. The Crown submits that her evidence is entirely credible and reliable with respect to that incident. The Crown contends that Ms. Oliveira's description of being assaulted by the accused at the top level by being placed on the railing against her will should be accepted as true.
54Defence counsel submits that Ms. Oliveira's claim that she was assaulted in the elevator is uncorroborated and, therefore, not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It is submitted that there is no evidence of urine in the elevator to support her testimony that he forced her to urinate there. The defence submits that the complainant “can’t have it both ways. She said that the accused brought her downtown to apologize to his friends and flirt with other women as well as saying that Mr. Lundi wouldn’t let her leave the parking garage and threatened to drop her off the railing.” It is submitted that her position is untenable because her testimony is not truthful or reliable. As well, Ms. Oliveira's testimony was that Mr. Lundi climbed the stairs in front of her. It is submitted that if Ms. Oliveira was being coerced to go with him, she could have taken the opportunity at that time to flee.
55In my view, the video surveillance evidence firmly supports the testimony of Ms. Oliveira that Mr. Lundi choked her. In her testimony she could only remember it happening once, but the surveillance video shows that Mr. Lundi choked her on four separate occasions. The first occurred at 11:47:16 p.m. It was sudden and violent. While there is no audio content, it is evident from Mr. Lundi’s body language and facial expression that he is extremely upset and angry. He is constantly gesticulating and pacing. Ms. Oliveira is clearly trying to keep her distance from him. Mr. Lundi directs her to sit on a small white box in the lobby. Ms. Oliveira heads towards the white box when the accused again grabs her by the throat, clearly applying pressure, and backs her up against the wall. Then other people leave the elevator and Mr. Lundi retreats to a corner where he looks at his cell phone. He then appears to take a video or photographs of Ms. Oliveira. A few moments later the accused violently grabs Ms. Oliveira by the throat for a third time and kisses her. They move to the right side of the lobby where Ms. Oliveira is clearly attempting to keep Mr. Lundi at bay. At 11:49:10 p.m. Mr. Lundi backs her against the wall. He again grabs her by the throat and leans the weight of his body into hers. He stops when people exit the elevator. At 11:49:20 p.m. Mr. Lundi again has Ms. Oliveira against the wall but this time, he puts his hands behind his back as Ms. Oliveira again tries to keep some distance from him. Mr. Lundi gets down on his knees and then directs her to get into the elevator.
56Mr. Lundi did not and, frankly, could not deny what is clearly depicted in the videos. He said he was frustrated and just wanted Ms. Oliveira to cooperate and let him take her home. I do not accept his testimony that he was pleading with Ms. Oliveira to let him drive her home. Mr. Lundi could have driven her home or simply left her there. The reality was that Mr. Lundi was still furious with Ms. Oliveira and wanted her to apologize to his friends for accusing him of assaulting her at the Rowallen house party. In the parking garage he was so enraged that he choked Ms. Oliveira four times in full view of the surveillance camera. I also believe Ms. Oliveira’s testimony that the accused also choked her in the elevator.
57The Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi is guilty of assault by choking as alleged in count 20 .
58Mr. Lundi faces a charge of forcible seizure under s. 279.2. The section reads that everyone who, without lawful authority, confines imprisons or forcibly seizes another person is guilty of an indictable offence.”
59The evidence establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi deprived Ms. Oliveira of her liberty to move from point to point. I accept her testimony that Mr. Lundi controlled her movements in the parking garage. Ms. Oliveira told him she had to go to the bathroom. She did this to try and get away from him. He would not let her go to the washroom. Instead, he directed her to urinate in the elevator. Mr. Lundi agreed that she squatted in the elevator but did not urinate. In the Exhibit 3 Level 4 video, Ms. Oliveira is seen getting out of the elevator pulling her dress down. Mr. Lundi directed her movements in the lobby of level 4. The video evidence shows that she was fearful of the accused as he directed her to sit on the white box in the lobby. He twice forced her against the wall and prevented her from moving away. He demanded that she enter the elevator near the end of the Level 4 video clip. I believe Ms. Oliveira that Mr. Lundi forced her to walk with him up the stairwell to the top level of the parking garage and, once there, picked her up and sat her down on the railing . She resisted him and fought to get off the railing. She was able to get down and ran away. I accept Ms. Oliveira's testimony that she was terrified and felt forced to do what he told her to do.
60Mr. Lundi is guilty of forcible seizure as alleged in count 6.
61Count 7 alleges that when Mr. Lundi put her on the railing at the top of the parkade stairwell, he threatened to kill her. He said “I’m going to jail tonight. I don’t give a fuck. I’m going to fucking kill you. I'm going to kill you.”
62Mr. Lundi testified that he did not recall climbing up the stairwell in the parking garage. However, he was also able to say that Ms. Oliveira's description of being threatened and assaulted at the top of the stairwell was a fabrication. I reject Mr. Lundi’s testimony. I agree with the Crown’s argument that it is unbelievable that Mr. Lundi could give that evidence if he didn’t remember climbing the stairs. His evidence was inconsistent. Again, I found him to be an evasive and untruthful witness. Mr. Lundi’s evidence did not leave the court in reasonable doubt that he threatened the complainant.
63Ms. Oliveira was entirely credible about this incident. Her evidence was detailed and compelling. She was able to identify in Exhibit 4 page 14 where Lundi made her sit down and where he made her sit on the railing . Exhibit 17 is a video that reveals the two to be in the stairwell just prior to this incident. She is visibly fearful and afraid and pleading with the accused to calm down. I accept her testimony that the accused threatened to kill her at the top of the stairwell.
64Mr. Lundi is guilty on count 7: Utter death threats.
The Rowallen House Party Incidents: Count 1: Assault; Count 3:Assault; Count 4: Utter threats; Count 5 Utter Threats; Count 18: Assault; Count 19 Assault by Choking
65Counts 1 and 18 relate to alleged assaults by Mr. Lundi against Ms. Oliveira on the porch of the Rowallen house during the party they attended. Count 19 relates to an allegation that the accused assaulted Ms. Oliveira by choking her in Pascale Brisson’s vehicle. Count 3 alleges that when leaving the party and while waiting for an Uber, Mr. Lundi struck Ms. Oliveira on her head and hand. Count 4 alleges that he made death threats against her while they waited for an Uber to arrive. Count 5 alleges that during the Uber ride, Mr. Lundi repeatedly uttered death threats in both English and French to Ms. Oliveira.
66Ms. Oliveira testified that soon after arriving at the house party, she told Mr. Lundi that people were doing drugs, including cocaine. This upset the accused and according to Ms. Oliveira, “everything escalated”. Mr. Lundi asked her to go outside and talk. She agreed but felt apprehensive given how upset Mr. Lundi had been earlier in the day. Ms. Oliveira sat on one of the chairs on the porch of the house. She testified that Mr. Lundi was upset about what she had said about other guests using drugs and slapped her on her left thigh which left a mark. Ms. Oliveira went inside the party and complained to Mr. Lundi’s friend Jordan and others that Mr. Lundi had slapped her leg. Jordan then discussed this with Mr. Lundi. Mr. Lundi took Ms. Oliveira to the porch a second time and asked her “Why are you embarrassing me? Why are you lying?”. He had Ms. Oliveira sit down on one of the chairs. Ms. Oliveira said that he was even more upset than the first incident on the porch. This time he slapped her on her right thigh. Ms. Oliveira said that this assault also left a mark. She ran into the house and the backyard telling people that Mr. Lundi had hurt her. Mr. Lundi told those people that she was lying.
67In testimony, Mr. Lundi said that he and Ms. Oliveira were on the front porch once. When shown a photograph of the porch area, he could not recall if the chairs depicted in the photo were there at the time. He said that Ms. Oliveira believed he had been texting with another woman named Anika and that she insisted on inspecting his phone. Mr. Lundi then snatched the phone off her thigh, told her to leave him alone and went back inside the house. Inside the house, people were “looking at him weird”. Jordan told him that Ms. Oliveira was claiming he slapped her on her thigh. This was not true, and he felt embarrassed. He believed Ms. Oliveira was drunk and jealous. He denied ever going to the porch a second time. He testified that he did not assault Ms. Oliveira on the porch at any time.
68Upon a consideration of the evidence, I did not find Mr. Lundi’s denial to be credible. Again, I found his answers to be evasive and inconsistent. For example, Mr. Lundi claimed that he did not remember there were even chairs on the porch, yet he was able to recall that Ms. Oliveira used her left hand to pick up the phone.
69I believe Ms. Oliveira’s evidence about what she said occurred on the porch. She said the initial slap left a red mark on her thigh. Jordan Shaker testified that Ms. Oliveira complained to him that Mr. Lundi had assaulted her. Jordan said that she showed him the mark on her leg which he described as the size of baseball. He recalled the colour of the bruise to be “purple bluish” and he thought it looked “previous”. I have viewed exhibit 17 where Ms. Oliveira is pleading with the accused in the parking garage. There is a visible reddish colour mark on her right thigh. I believe this mark is attributable to one of the slaps described by the complainant. I accept the testimony of Ms. Oliveira that the accused was angry with her about her comments about drug use by guests at the party. I accept her testimony that she was led to the porch a second time by the accused after she complained to his friends about the assault. Mr. Lundi was even angrier and slapped on her other thigh. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty of assault in counts 1 and 18.
70After these assaults occurred, Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi took her to Pascale’s car where he straddled her in the back seat and choked her. Mr. Lundi denied that this incident ever occurred.
71I was impressed by the compelling and detailed evidence provided by Ms. Oliveira concerning this incident. She said that she did not go to the car voluntarily. The accused was furious, telling her he needed to talk to her, and he was upset that she was lying. He forced her into the back seat of the car. He put his hands around her neck and used force. She was unable to breath. He was telling her “You’re fucking embarrassing me. Don’t humiliate me. Get up, you’re going to apologize”. She was in the back seat, and he was on top of her. Mr. Lundi stopped because Pascale Brisson, the owner of the car, came out and said, “you’re not doing this in my car, get the fuck out of my car”.
72Ms. Brisson was not called as a witness in this trial. Jordan Shaker testified he believed he had the keys to Pascale’s car. Yet he was unable to say where people were sitting in the car on the way to the party. He was also adamant that Mr. Lundi and Ms. Oliveira were never out of his sight. Mr. Shaker’s memory is not reliable in that he was clearly wrong on this point. There is no issue that the two were out of his sight when they were on the porch and in Firefly Park.
73Ms. Oliveira described how Mr. Lundi choked her in Pascale’s vehicle. He put his thumbs around her face and the rest of his fingers around her neck. Injury photographs entered into evidence show small red spots on her neck and bruising on the left side of her face as does the ring video from Ms. Oliveira’s residence. These injuries correspond to the violence she said Mr. Lundi used in Pascale’s car. I accept her testimony as to what occurred in the vehicle as truthful and reliable.
74The Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused assaulted Ms. Oliveira by choking and is guilty on count 19.
Waiting for and riding in Uber to the Byward Market- Count 3: Assault; Count 4:Utter Threats; Count 5: Utter Threats
75After the incident in Firefly Park, Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi called an Uber. He told her, “You have to pay me back for this Uber. Look what you have done now.” As they were waiting for an Uber, Ms. Oliveira said while they were waiting for the Uber, Mr. Lundi punched her on the left side of her head above the ear. Also, Mr. Lundi made a closed fist and then brought his fist down hard hitting the top of her hand. She couldn’t say whether his hand was open or closed when he struck her head. She felt extremely dizzy and had a bump on the left side of her head as well as bruising on her hand.
76Ms. Oliveira said she got in the Uber because Mr. Lundi had just assaulted her and told her she had no choice. He told her that the only place she was going was with him to apologize to his friends downtown. Ms. Oliveira said that during the Uber ride, Mr. Lundi applied significant pressure to her thigh with his right hand. Mr. Lundi told her that he was going to jail today. He kept saying in French that he was going to kill her. He told her, “I will never forget”. At one point, the Uber driver interjected and asked them what was going on. Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi threated to kill her at least 7 times during the 15-minute Uber ride to the parking garage.
77Mr. Lundi denied ever threatening or assaulting Ms. Oliveira while waiting for the Uber or during the Uber ride to the parking garage. His only aim was to get her home and to retrieve some of his personal belongings from her residence.
78The defence argues that none of the injuries Ms. Oliveira clamed to suffered in the Uber ride were visible in the ring camera footage from Grammond Circle or corroborated by other evidence. As well, the police spoke with the two at one point while they were waiting for the Uber at Rowallen and there was no evidence that officers noted any injuries to Ms. Oliveira or received any complaint from her about Mr. Lundi’s alleged conduct. It is submitted that the Crown failed to prove any of the Uber-related charges beyond a reasonable doubt.
79I agree with defence counsel that there is a lack of independent confirmatory evidence regarding the Uber events such as there is with respect to the Firefly Park and the Byward Market parking garage incidents. However, the independent evidence supporting Ms. Oliveira’s account regarding those incidents confirmed that Ms. Oliveira’s was a credible witness while Mr. Lundi was not. Ms. Oliveira’s overall credibility with respect to all of the events was significantly bolstered while Mr. Lundi’s overall credibility was, in my view, badly damaged.
80Pages 3-5 of Exhibit 10, injury photos taken by Ms. Oliveira and her sister, show extensive bruising to the complainant’s hand. She told the court that the bruising was caused because of Mr. Lundi hitting her hand. I accept her testimony on this point. While there is no independent evidence regarding the punch to the head, I believe Ms. Oliveira that Mr. Lundi struck her. She said she was squeezed on her right thigh area in the Uber and the injury photos in exhibit 9 show extensive bruising to the right thigh area. I also believe Ms. Oliveira that Mr. Lundi threatened to kill her during the Uber ride. He was still very angry at the complainant for telling his friends that he had assaulted her. Mr. Lundi was determined that she apologize for this. The Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi is guilty of Count 3:assault and Counts 4 and 5: Utter threats.
Incidents at JTM Bar Count 8: Assault; Count 9: Mischief
81Ms. Oliveira described going to a bar named JTM after leaving the parking garage. She went there because she knew people who worked there, and that Mr. Lundi followed her in. Ms. Oliveira said she used a bouncer’s phone to call her mother to pick her up and take her home. Mr. Lundi had taken her phone. She didn’t want to speak to Mr. Lundi inside the bar and went outside to the patio where there were bouncers. She testified that Mr. Lundi followed her outside and then stepped on her left foot very aggressively which she said was done to intimidate her. Ms. Oliveira was wearing flip flops. After stepping on her foot, Mr. Lundi took her phone which she was holding in her hand. Ms. Oliveira borrowed a bouncer’s phone to contact her mother to tell her where on Clarence she could be picked up. Ms. Santos called her daughter, but Mr. Lundi answered the phone. After they spoke, he gave Ms. Oliveira’s phone back to her.
82In cross-examination, Ms. Oliveira admitted that she saw police officers near the bar while she waited for her mother but did not speak to them. She said that all she wanted was to get home to her children.
83Mr. Lundi testified the two spent almost an hour at JTM’s. He denied taking Ms. Oliveira’s phone and said that when Ms. Santos called her daughter, Ms. Oliveira passed her phone to him so he could speak with Ms. Santos. Mr. Lundi said that Ms. Oliveira was lying when she said she used a bouncer’s phone. He could not recall stepping on the complainant’s foot.
84I did not believe Mr. Lundi assertions that he neither stepped on Ms. Oliveira’s foot nor took over her phone. His evidence on these points did not leave the court in reasonable doubt. I accept the evidence of Ms. Oliveira that he did those things. In the injury photos in Exhibit 9 (image 9615), one can see that Ms. Oliveira’s left foot is badly swollen and bruised. I believe Ms. Oliveira that the accused stomped on her foot. It is also not believable that Ms. Oliveira would willingly relinquish her phone to Mr. Lundi when she was desperate to leave Mr. Lundi and communicate with her mother about picking her up. I believe her testimony that Mr. Lundi took her phone without her consent and intercepted a call from Ms. Santos intended for Ms. Oliveira
85The Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi assaulted Ms., Oliveira and that he is guilty on Count 8: assault and Count 9: mischief.
Car Ride to and incidents at Grammond Circle Count 9: Utter Threats; Count 10: Assault; Count 12: Assault; Count 13: Mischief; Count 15: Theft Under 5000; Count 17: Mischief
86Count 9 alleges that Mr. Lundi threatened to kill Ms. Oliveira and her family during the ride home with her mother Bertilde Santos. During her testimony, Ms. Oliveira maintained that she had been threatened so much she did not have a specific recollection of the threats in the car with Bertilde. She said that she had interpreted as threats against her and her family when the accused said, ‘this is war”.
87I have reviewed an audio recording of the car ride (Exhibit 15). Mr. Lundi is in a state of rage, yelling at Ms. Oliveira and Ms. Santos. His tone of voice is very intimidating. He directs many derogatory comments to Ms. Oliveira and her mother. Mr. Lundi yelled at Ms. Oliveira, “You ruined my whole day.!” He demands that she go downtown to apologize to his friends and when Ms. Oliveira refuses, Mr. Lundi says “we are going to have a big problem.” He also says “ I need my girlfriend to step up and real women step up. They know how to keep their man happy; they do the little things. They don’t complain. We are not equal. A man needs a relationship. Get with the program. All this nonsense is bullshit. Women don’t lead shit.”
88However, the audio recording does not include a threat to cause injury or death. Mr. Lundi said, “I got lawyers, I got accountants” and starts screaming “y’all want war, let’s go to war.” He also said, “ Until you apologize to me and fix this shit, I am coming with the smoke.” In my view, Mr. Lundi seemed to be inviting a court battle as opposed to making threats to use violence.
89The Crown has not proven that he is guilty of uttering a death threat. Count 9 is therefore dismissed.
90Count 10 alleges that Mr. Lundi pushed Bertilde Santos in the entryway of the residence at Grammond Circle. Ms. Santos did not testify. Ms. Oliveira testified that she saw the accused push her mother and then step over her mother when he entered the residence. Ms. Oliveira testified that “his body pushed her” and that her mother fell “completely backwards”. Mr. Lundi denied pushing Bertilde. He testified that she lost her balance, fell and then falsely accused him of pushing her.
91There is no question that Bertilde did not want the accused in her house. She told him repeatedly to leave and he refused. Mr. Lundi did enter the house when Bertilde was at the entranceway. It is not clear on the record before me that the accused pushed Ms. Santos or whether she lost her balance as Mr. Lundi walked by her. It is not clear on the evidence whether he assaulted her by pushing her. Count 10 is therefore dismissed.
92Count 12 alleges that Mr. Lundi pushed Ms. Oliveira's daughter Malia at Grammond Circle. The Crown concedes that this charge should be dismissed for lack of evidence. I agree. Count 12 is therefore dismissed.
93Count 13 alleges that Mr. Lundi committed mischief by damaging a door at 310 Grammond Circle. Ms. Oliveira testified that Mr. Lundi went into the garage. He was kicking and banging on the door leading from the garage into the house. The door is depicted in exhibits 7 and 8 with obvious damage. Ms. Oliveira said that prior to the incident the door was not damaged.
94Exhibit 6 is an audio recording of the accused in the garage. He is enraged and wants Ms. Oliveira to come outside and speak to him. Bertilde is pleading with him to leave because he is “terrifying the children”. She tells him to “stop breaking the door, stop banging the door.” Mr. Lundi is then heard repeatedly banging on the door and saying I’m going to break into the house. Malia is heard sobbing. Bertilde tells him repeatedly to stop breaking the door. He tells Bertilde to tell Sabrina to apologize to him.
95The audiotape of the accused banging forcefully and repeatedly on the door is compelling evidence. I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that he wilfully damaged the door in the garage as charged. He is guilty of mischief on count 13.
96There is no dispute that Mr. Lundi took Ms. Oliveira's purse from her home without her permission. Ms. Oliveira testified that she saw the accused grab her purse off the kitchen counter and run outside with it while she went to pick up her son at the bottom of the stairs. She testified that he had put up her phone upstairs by this point. After a few minutes, he returned it He is seen on the ring video on exhibit 6 taking the purse and running away. Ms. Oliveira could not recall what Mr. Lundi had in her purse that day. She agreed that she “may have potentially carried something at some point” of Alain’s in her purse. Mr. Lundi claimed that he had colour of right to do so because he wanted to retrieve his credit cards and cologne which were in the purse. He is then seen returning the purse.
97On this record, I am unable to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused intended to steal Ms. Oliveira's purse as opposed to retrieving his cards. Count 15 is dismissed.
98With respect to count 17 alleging mischief, the evidentiary basis for this count relates to Mr. Lundi’s behaviour at the residence of Ms. Oliveira and Ms. Santos which the Crown alleges interfered with lawful use or enjoyment of the property. Ms. Oliveira described, and the ring videos show the accused banging at the door and hollering at approximately 2 a.m. in a residential neighbourhood. He is heard and seen yelling “open the fucking door” and is banging on both the front door and garage door.
99The defence argues that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Lundi’s conduct disrupted the lawful use of the neighbourhood. The noise outside ceased within a short time, when police responded to calls for service from Ms. Oliveira, not any neighbours.
100There is no evidence that Mr. Lundi’s conduct interfered with the lawful use or enjoyment of property of neighbours. However, there is overwhelming evidence that Mr. Lundi interfered with the lawful use and enjoyment by Ms. Oliveira, her children and Ms. Santos of their property on Grammond Circle. He was a trespasser and refused the requests of Ms. Santos and Mr. Oliveira. Instead, he walked into the house without their permission. Mr. Lundi’s behaviour constituted a clear interference with their lawful use and enjoyment of their property. The Crown has proven Mr. Lundi’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on count 19: mischief.
101In summary, the verdicts in this trial are as follows:
Count Offence Verdict
1
Assault (porch slap left thigh)
Guilty
2
Assault by choking (Firefly Park)
Guilty
3
Assault (hand/head before Uber)
Guilty
4
Utter threats (waiting for Uber)
Guilty
5
Utter threats (in Uber)
Guilty
6
Forcible seizure (garage)
Guilty
7
Utter threats (garage stairwell)
Guilty
8
Assault (foot stomp at JTM)
Guilty
9
Utter threats (car ride with mother)
Dismissed
10
Assault (push mother)
Dismissed
11
Utter threats (Firefly Park)
Dismissed
12
Assault (push daughter)
Dismissed
13
Mischief (garage door damage)
Guilty
14
Assault (Firefly Park kicks/slaps)
Guilty
15
Theft (purse)
Dismissed
16
Mischief (interfere with phone)
Guilty
17
Mischief (interfere with enjoyment)
Guilty
18
Assault (porch slap right thigh)
Guilty
19
Assault by choking (in car)
Guilty
20
Assault by choking (garage)
Guilty
Released: July 25, 2025
Justice T. Lipson