Russell Silverstein

The accused was convicted after trial of assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm following a stabbing incident at a bar.

The Crown sought 15-18 months imprisonment, while the defence sought a suspended sentence with probation.

The court imposed a 90-day intermittent sentence for assault with a weapon and a 15-month conditional sentence for assault causing bodily harm, to be served consecutively, along with a one-year probation term.

A weapons prohibition and DNA order were also imposed.

The conviction for possession of a weapon for a purpose dangerous to the public peace was stayed.

The accused was charged with assault with a weapon (a chair) and assault causing bodily harm against his mother.

The Crown alleged that the accused intentionally struck his mother on the head with a chair, causing a gash requiring 10 stitches.

The accused claimed the injury was accidental, resulting from him dropping the chair from chest level.

The court found the accused guilty on both counts, rejecting the defence of accident based on the credibility of the complainant and Crown witnesses, the accused's inconsistent statements, his post-incident behavior, and the circumstantial evidence of intent.

The accused was charged with threatening death to two individuals, assaulting one with a weapon, and failing to comply with a recognizance.

The charges arose from an incident on March 19, 2017 at a residential property in Scarborough.

The Crown presented evidence from the alleged victims and supporting video and audio recordings.

The defence argued that the injuries were self-inflicted and that the allegations were fabricated.

The court found the Crown's evidence credible and corroborated by objective evidence, while finding the accused's testimony contradicted by video evidence and lacking credibility.

The accused was convicted on all counts.

The accused was charged with assault with a weapon, assault causing bodily harm, and possession of a weapon dangerous to the public peace following an altercation at a bar.

The accused admitted to stabbing the complainant with a knife but claimed self-defense.

The court found that while force was being used against the accused and the stabbing may have been intended for self-defense, the stabbing was not reasonable in the circumstances.

The accused was the aggressor, initiated physical contact, was the first to draw and unsheathe his knife, and had multiple opportunities to de-escalate the conflict.

The court convicted on all three counts.

The accused was charged with aggravated assault and threatening bodily harm arising from an alleged altercation on September 4, 2016.

The complainant suffered a significant incised wound to his left arm requiring over 60 stitches.

The Crown's case relied entirely on the complainant's identification of the accused as the perpetrator.

However, the complainant had initially provided police with a false identification, claiming an unknown black male was responsible, later recanting this account after speaking with his sister.

The court found the complainant's identification of the accused was rendered problematic by this initial false identification and was uncorroborated despite multiple witnesses present at the scene.

The court concluded that in the absence of supporting evidence and given the radically inconsistent statements regarding the perpetrator's identity, reasonable doubt existed as to whether the accused was responsible for the injuries.

The accused was charged with possession of a prohibited weapon (a flick knife) found during a police search of his pants pocket.

The accused brought an application to exclude the knife pursuant to s. 24(2) of the Charter, arguing that it was obtained in violation of his rights under ss. 8, 9, and 10(b) of the Charter.

The court found that the police detention of the accused became unlawful when he was removed from the van without proper grounds, and that the accused was denied access to counsel of choice throughout his detention.

The court excluded the knife as evidence and dismissed the charge.