Paul D. Larsh

The accused applied for a change of venue for a new jury trial after her previous conviction for second degree murder was set aside and a new trial ordered.

Both the defence and the Crown agreed that a change of venue from the original judicial district was necessary due to extensive media publicity surrounding the case.

The dispute concerned the appropriate venue, with the accused seeking either Pembroke or Ottawa while the Crown proposed Sudbury.

The court weighed factors including witness convenience, community impartiality, the accused’s financial hardship, and trial scheduling.

Balancing these considerations, the court held that the interests of justice favoured transferring the trial to Ottawa.

An offender convicted of two counts of first degree murder applied for a reduction in the period of parole ineligibility under the faint hope provisions of the Criminal Code.

At the judicial screening stage, the court assessed whether there was a substantial likelihood that a jury would unanimously recommend a reduction in parole ineligibility.

Although the applicant had maintained relatively positive institutional conduct and was assessed as a low risk to public safety, he continued to deny responsibility for the murders and expressed no remorse.

Given the extreme violence, planning, and multiple-victim nature of the offences, the court concluded that a properly instructed jury would not likely reduce the parole ineligibility period.

The application was dismissed at the screening stage.