P.L. Bellefontaine

The accused, on trial for firearms and obstruction offences, brought a mistrial application after admitting to possessing a handgun during cross-examination on a Charter application regarding excessive force by a police canine.

The defence argued the admission tainted the trial judge and compromised trial fairness.

The court dismissed the application, finding the cross-examination was proper to assess credibility and the necessity of police force, and affirming that a trial judge can disabuse themselves of inadmissible inculpatory evidence.

The accused was charged with driving while suspended, making unreasonable noise, failing to identify, and assaulting and obstructing a peace officer following a traffic stop.

The court found that the officers failed to strictly comply with the preconditions for a warrantless arrest under s. 33(3) of the Highway Traffic Act, rendering the arrest unlawful and acquitting the accused of the criminal charges and failure to identify.

However, based on uncontradicted evidence, the accused was found guilty of driving while suspended and making unreasonable noise.

The accused, a psychological associate, was charged with three counts of fraud for allegedly misleading clients by using the title 'Doctor' and failing to explicitly identify himself as a psychological associate rather than a psychologist.

The clients had retained him for counseling and child custody assessments.

The court found that while the accused's use of the title 'Doctor' constituted a fraudulent act, the Crown failed to prove that this misrepresentation caused any financial deprivation or risk of loss to the complainants, as they likely would have retained him regardless of his specific licensing status.

Furthermore, the court found a reasonable doubt regarding whether the accused had the requisite mens rea for fraud.

The charges were dismissed.