R. O’Brien

The offender pleaded guilty to four counts of failing to comply with a recognizance prohibiting contact with a former intimate partner.

The breaches occurred on several occasions, including instances where contact was consensual and one incident involving attendance at a location where the complainant was present.

The court considered the offender’s prior criminal record for domestic-related violence and previous breaches of court orders, as well as psychiatric issues and limited rehabilitation prospects.

While some breaches were mitigated by the complainant’s consent or near-technical circumstances, the court emphasized the importance of enforcing recognizance conditions intended to protect vulnerable partners.

Applying the step principle and totality principle, the court imposed consecutive custodial sentences totaling seven months, followed by probation and a victim surcharge.

The accused was charged with personation and wilfully obstructing a peace officer after a driver stopped during a traffic investigation falsely identified himself as another individual.

The Crown relied primarily on the investigating officer’s in‑court identification of the accused more than two years after the stop, supported by limited circumstantial evidence relating to personal information provided by the driver.

The court emphasized the inherent unreliability of eyewitness identification evidence, particularly stranger identification and in‑dock identifications unsupported by contemporaneous descriptions or photo lineups.

The officer had made no contemporaneous notes of the driver’s physical characteristics and recalled only generic descriptors.

Considering the frailties of the identification evidence and the weakness of the circumstantial evidence, the court held that the Crown failed to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt.