Court File and Parties

Date: November 19, 2018 Court File No.: 17-0014 Ontario Court of Justice

Between: Her Majesty the Queen

-and-

Calvalene Tykell Akeena Aundra Beals

Before: Justice Michael G. March

Heard on: January 25, May 16 and October 22, 2018

Reasons for Judgment released on: November 19, 2018

Counsel:

• Lauren Rock and Nathalie Castonguay, for the Crown
• Jodie Primeau, for the Accused

Introduction

[1] New Year's Eve 2016 turned out to be a most unhappy occasion for the two principal actors in this trial. The accused, Calvalene Beals ("Beals"), received an invitation to come to Petawawa, ON from the complainant, Stephen Griffin ("Griffin"). They had met over a dating website called Plenty of Fish, some months earlier.

[2] A couple of days before January 1, 2017, Griffin drove down to the Greater Toronto Area ("GTA") to pick Beals up. Their first night together on December 30, 2016 was for the most part pleasant. The following day, December 31, 2016, Griffin and Beals were getting along as well. Sadly, the trend did not continue into the evening.

[3] Beals believed that Griffin had asked some friends over to his house to celebrate the coming of the New Year. Plans changed. Beals and Griffin ended up at a party at Andrea Adams' place. Ms. Adams ("Adams") was the significant other of Griffin's friend, Michael Wilson ("Wilson").

[4] The early part of the evening at Adams' place was a decidedly different experience for Griffin as opposed to Beals. Griffin continued to enjoy the merriment of the holiday season. Beals unfortunately felt like a fish out of water.

[5] Beals is a young black woman. She was well dressed for the party. Other attendees, all white, were probably less so.

[6] By 11:30 p.m. on December 31, 2016, Beals was ready to go back to Griffin's residence. She sensed that he was not so keen to leave. This made her somewhat upset.

[7] She called a cab – believing Griffin had not truly done so in spite of his assurances he had. Some physicality occurred outside Adams' residence. Hostilities only worsened upon Griffin's and Beal's return to his residence.

The Charges

[8] Beals stands charged with two counts of assault upon Griffin, one count of uttering a threat to him, and ten counts of mischief to his property. She entered pleas of not guilty to all but two counts of mischief. On October 22, 2018, at the conclusion of the evidence, Beals was re-arraigned and entered guilty pleas to three counts of mischief. She acknowledged damaging Griffin's couch, one of his wine glasses and his Sony speakers. Yet again, however, the Court was faced with a classic case of police overcharging.

Issues

[9] Beals elected to testify in her own defence. A W.D. analysis must apply to the evidence given at trial.

[10] The following issues arose for determination:

a) If I believe Beals, I must acquit her of the offences upon which she was tried, and did not change her plea?

b) Even if I do not believe Beals, does her evidence raise a reasonable doubt? If it does, I must, of course, acquit her on those counts where it does.

c) Even if I do not believe Beals, and her evidence raises no reasonable doubt in my mind in respect of the charges in issue, on the basis of the evidence I do accept, have I been satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of Beals' guilt for each of those charges?

Analysis

Beals' Evidence

[11] Beals gave her evidence in a very straightforward manner. She did perhaps downplay somewhat the amount of alcohol she had to drink on the night in question. By her account, she had wine and shots. She was "tipsy." Her testimony as to alcohol consumption was contradicted by the observations of the police officers who attended at Griffin's residence. She was assessed by police as "intoxicated."

[12] Half an hour before leaving Adams' residence, Beals was bored. The people at the party, and the overall atmosphere was not her "cup of tea." She wanted to leave.

[13] She expressed this intention to Griffin. She grew loud in making her wishes known. She apologized for doing so to Adams and her partner.

[14] When the cab finally arrived, Adams followed Beals outside. Adams called Beals "a bitch." Beals testified she was pushed by Adams. Her hand hit the taxi to brace herself. Beals was then punched in the face twice.

[15] At the time, Griffin was sitting in the cab with the door open and his feet on the ground. Beals felt that everyone was trying to get at her.

[16] Beals managed to enter the cab. It drove approximately six houses up the street. However, Griffin opened the cab door and exited. His friends, the partygoers, approached. They called Beals "a black bitch."

[17] Beals denied any attempts at striking Griffin or anyone else upon leaving the party.

[18] She explained her purpose in going back to Griffin's residence was to collect her things. She wanted to return home to the GTA. However, she could not remember if she had any money or a wallet.

[19] She conceded that during the cab ride, and upon arriving at Griffin's residence, she had probably called him an idiot. She described her emotional state as "super mad."

[20] She attributed to Griffin the following:

"If I were in Iraq. I would've shot you by now."

Apparently, he suggested to Beals too that he had five guns in his house. She felt intimidated by this threat, and humiliated by Griffin's racist friends.

[21] Beals wanted police to come to Griffin's house, but her phone was dead. She wanted Griffin to hand over his phone. He threw it at her. She threw it back at him. However, according to Beals, Griffin has clumsy fingers. He did not catch it. It suffered damage as a result.

[22] Beals admitted throwing a glass at the base of the wall near the floor. She did so out of frustration. She wanted police called.

[23] With that, according to Beals, Griffin put her up against a wall. He had his hands on her shoulders. She pushed back with her foot against the wall. She did not like having him in her face. He left.

[24] She admitted thereafter tearing up Griffin's couch with a knife. She pulled his Sony speaker off a wall and tipped over another. She denied that Griffin had 22 shirts, nor she said, did she threaten Griffin at any point.

[25] Having carefully assessed Beals' evidence on its own, and as against the backdrop of the evidence of the Crown's witnesses, I cannot believe her. She had more to drink than she contended. Police evidence and the cab driver's observations (Ex. 5) directly contradict her state of alcohol and aggression. Beals, in my view, gave evidence that was unreliable due to her alcohol consumption. Her emotional state, which was nothing short of pure rage, resulted in considerable damage being done to Griffin's residence.

[26] Actions speak louder than words. Beals' decision to trash Griffin's residence betrays any assertion she was fearful of him – ever – during her stay in Petawawa spanning December 30, 2016 to January 1, 2017.

[27] Beals wanted to hurt Griffin – directly and indirectly. I do not believe her when she says she did not touch, choke or punch him. She was annoyed at what she believed were his lies about having called a cab. She lashed out at him for bringing her to the party in the first place. She had had enough of Griffin and his friends. She wanted out of there. Anything she saw in her way preventing her from leaving was not going to stop her. At the time of her departure from Adams' house, she was drunk, determined, angry and loud.

[28] When she arrived at Griffin's residence, she did not cool down. She demanded his phone. In addition to making a call, she perhaps wanted to check to see if he had indeed telephoned for a cab. She was livid – understandably so – at the treatment she received at the end of the party at Adams' place. She blamed Griffin for this. She was exacting revenge on him for bringing her there. She wanted very much to make him pay for her humiliation.

[29] I do not believe she broke his laptop by accident. I reject that she sat on it earlier in the day (December 31, 2016) after her shower. The laptop was likely hurled the way she admitted she threw the glass. The mug probably suffered the same fate.

[30] She admitted tearing up Griffin's couch and snapping his speaker off the wall. Griffin's T.V. and plastic, indoor basketball net were broken as well. There is no reasonable inference I can draw other than that Beals intentionally caused damage to the T.V. and net. She was, too, at a minimum, reckless earlier in throwing Griffin's phone.

[31] I reject Beal's evidence that the football impacted the T.V. when Griffin and she were playing fetch with the dogs.

[32] The net was more than likely broken while Griffin was outside seeking refuge from Beals' destruction of his home.

[33] All of the raging through Griffin's house and the havoc she wrought was wilful on her part. Her conduct was not justified, nor accidental in any way.

[34] I do not believe Beal's claim that Griffin did not have 22 shirts. She took a knife and slashed Griffin's couch. During the same rampage, I have no doubt she sliced up a great number of Griffin's shirts. Again, no other reasonable inference to explain the damages incurred can be drawn.

[35] I accept Griffin's evidence that none of his personal property in question was damaged when he stepped out to get help. He was able to observe through the windows of his house Beals moving from room to room. When he returned, his home was not at all in the same state in which he left it.

Does Beals' Evidence Raise a Reasonable Doubt

[36] It does not. Beal's anger and humiliation caused her to lash out at Griffin's person and belongings. Her evidence left me with no doubt as to the cause of the scratch marks to Griffin's neck, and the damage done to his property. Beals was responsible for both.

On the Basis of the Evidence I Accept, Am I Satisfied Beyond a Reasonable Doubt of Beal's Guilt?

[37] I am. However, I am not so satisfied in respect of all of Beals' charges in issue. I do believe Griffin was assaulted before he entered the cab. I do not believe he was choked or hit in the back of the head inside the taxi. I accept Wilson's evidence that he saw Beals slap Griffin in the face, push him in the chest and grab him by the throat. The photos taken of Griffin during the evening of January 1, 2017 confirm he suffered scratch marks to his throat area.

[38] I do not believe he was assaulted in the cab or at his home. The cab driver did not see or hear any physicality between Beals or Griffin when they were his passengers (Ex. 5). Griffin was somewhat unclear as to the cause of his injuries. He was not "100% sure." He did not mention being assaulted when he first spoke to police.

[39] Although, of course, I do not have to be absolutely certain of Beal's guilt, I must be sure. I am not when it comes to two assaults. Frankly, without Wilson's evidence and the photos depicting the scratch marks, I would not be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of Beals' guilt for the assault involving grabbing Griffin by the neck before he got into the cab. As a result, I shall find her guilty of Count 1, but not Count 2.

[40] Nor have I been persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt that Beals uttered a threat to Griffin. Under cross-examination, Griffin agreed that he told the officer to whom he gave his statement on June 1, 2017, in discussing the alleged threat:

"I think I was pretty drunk. I could have turned it the wrong way…"

[41] I take Griffin to mean by this earlier statement to police that he could have misinterpreted what Beals was saying. Consequently, I am not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Beals uttered a threat to Griffin. I will find her not guilty of Count 3.

[42] With respect to Counts 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 12 and 13 inclusive, the seven individual counts of mischief laid against Beals and upon which she was tried, I will for the reasons already given find her guilty of Count 4 (indoor basketball net), Count 5 (LG television), Count 7 (Dell laptop), Count 9 (Samsung cell phone), Count 12 (mug) and Count 13 (clothes). I can draw no other reasonable inference, and can safely conclude that these items were all damaged during Beals' rampage through Griffin's house upon their return from the party.

[43] I will find Beals not guilty of Count 10 (wall). While I do not believe that Griffin threatened Beals with a gun, or applied any real force upon her person, I do entertain a reasonable doubt that he laid hands upon her shoulders. He likely did so to prevent Beals from damaging his property. Beals' explanation that she pushed with her foot against the wall to escape Griffin's grasp may reasonably be true. As a result, I must acquit her on Count 10.

Conclusion

[44] In summary, Beals shall be found guilty of the following:

• Count 1 – Assault (grabbing and scratching Griffin's neck before they entered the cab) – s. 266
• Count 4 – Mischief (indoor basketball net) – s. 430(4)
• Count 5 – Mischief (LG television) – s. 430(4)
• Count 6 – Mischief (couch) – s. 430(4)
• Count 7 – Mischief (Dell laptop) – s. 430(4)
• Count 8 – Mischief (wine glass) – s. 430(4)
• Count 9 – Mischief (Samsung cell phone) – s. 430(4)
• Count 11 – Mischief (set of Sony speakers) – s. 430(4)
• Count 12 – Mischief (mug) – s. 430(4)
• Count 13 – Mischief (clothes) – s. 430(4)

[45] On Counts 2, 3 and 10, Beals shall be found not guilty.

Dated: November 19, 2018

The Honourable Mr. Justice M. March

Footnotes

[1] R. v. W.(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742

See the oft quoted direction of Cory J. on the instructions to be given to jurors on the charge, or recharge, by a trial judge. Provincial court judges sitting alone must instruct themselves accordingly as well as follows:

First, if you believe the evidence of the accused, obviously you must acquit.

Second, if you do not believe the testimony of the accused but you are left in a reasonable doubt by it, you must acquit.

Third, even if you are not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, you must ask yourself whether, on the basis of the evidence which you do accept, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by that evidence of the guilt of the accused.