Pamela Keri Zbarsky

The accused, Henning Jonat, faced charges related to child pornography.

A blended voir dire was held to consider applications to exclude evidence based on alleged Charter breaches, including an s. 8 breach for obtaining subscriber information without a warrant (admitted by the Crown) and an s. 10(b) breach for questioning the accused after he expressed a desire to consult counsel.

The court found the s. 8 breach was in good faith pre-Spencer, and the s. 10(b) breach had minor impact, with the Crown not seeking to use the statements.

Other alleged breaches regarding chat logs, search warrant validity, and strip search were rejected.

All applications to exclude evidence were dismissed.

The accused, B.W., was charged with sexual interference under section 151 of the Criminal Code involving the complainant, S.L., who was under 16 years of age.

The alleged incidents occurred in a church basement between 2000 and 2007.

The Crown relied on S.L.'s testimony and a written 'confession' letter from B.W. The court found significant reliability issues with S.L.'s evidence due to inconsistencies in her account of the incidents and disclosures, and credibility concerns with T.S., S.L.'s mother, particularly regarding her handling of the school disclosure and the circumstances surrounding the 'confession' letter.

The court concluded that the 'confession' letter was heavily influenced by T.S. and potentially linked to a financial demand.

Ultimately, the court was not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that B.W. committed the offence or that S.L. was sexually touched by anyone.

B.W. was acquitted.

A youth was charged with aggravated assault by wounding contrary to section 268 of the Criminal Code following a hip check delivered during a house league hockey game that resulted in a serious leg fracture to the victim.

The Crown alleged the defendant intentionally applied force without consent.

The defence argued the defendant momentarily forgot he was playing non-contact hockey and instinctively executed a properly-trained hip check from his years of rep hockey experience.

The court found the defendant not guilty, accepting that he was in early transition from contact to non-contact hockey, had just participated in contact high school tryouts two days prior, and that the hip check, while spectacular in result, was a properly executed check that would have been acceptable in contact hockey.

The court found the Crown failed to negate implied consent beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Crown brought an application to admit the audio and written statements of a deceased witness under the principled exception to the hearsay rule.

The court accepted that necessity was established because the declarant had died, but considered whether the statements met the threshold reliability requirement.

The court held that the unsigned and undated handwritten statements lacked sufficient indicia of reliability and authenticity and were therefore inadmissible.

However, the recorded audio interview was found sufficiently reliable and probative, given its voluntary nature, contemporaneity, detailed content, and potential corroboration by other witnesses.

The audio statement was admitted subject to editing to remove speculative or prejudicial portions.