[1] Byron Sonne came to the attention of the Toronto Police Service on June 15, 2010, when he was observed taking photographs of the security fence that was being erected in advance of the G20 Summit. In the same timeframe, an investigation by G20 intelligence officers uncovered a Twitter[^1] account and a Flickr[^2] account and both were suspected to belong to Mr. Sonne. The Flickr account contained a very large number of photographs of the security fence and police security cameras that had been installed for the G20 Summit and photographs of police officers, some with derogatory captions, and photographs of places like the rear of the American Embassy. Older photographs, dating from 2009, included several that appeared to depict what was believed to be a makeshift projectile launcher (later identified as a potato cannon[^3]), wooden boards showing damage apparently from shooting various objects with this launcher, and a device that appeared to be a modified microwave oven and believed to be a “wave guide”, which the police believed could be used to interfere with police surveillance cameras and communications. Posts on the Twitter account described design flaws in the security fence and items that could be used to climb or pull it down.

[2] Mr. Sonne was arrested on June 22, 2010 while riding on a TTC bus. Immediately thereafter the police began to execute a warrant to search 58 Elderwood Drive, the home Mr. Sonne shared with his wife. Based on the named offences in the warrant, the police were to search for various items including the wave guide. During the search of the basement of the house, the officers found a workshop containing a variety of laboratory equipment and a collection of chemicals stored in individually labelled jars and what was later identified as an electrolysis cell (also referred to as an electrochemical cell) in the furnace room. Other chemicals were found in the attached garage. There had been no expectation that chemicals would be found in Mr. Sonne’s home. A second warrant to search the home was obtained the next day expanding the list of named offences and the items to be searched for to include items related to the production of explosive substances as well as extending the duration of the search.

[3] Mr. Sonne stands charged with four counts of unlawfully possessing six explosive substances and / or the ingredients to make them, contrary to section 82(1) of the Criminal Code, namely tri-acetone tri-peroxide (“TATP”), hexamethylene tri-peroxide diamine (“HMTD”), urea nitrate, hexamine dinitrate (“HDN”), and two oxidizer-based explosive substances, one using potassium chlorate and the other ammonium nitrate. In addition, Mr. Sonne is charged with one count of counselling persons unknown to commit the indictable offence of mischief which offence was not committed, contrary to section 464 of the Criminal Code. This charge relates to his photographs and posts on Flickr and Twitter in connection with the G20 security fence. Mr. Sonne re-elected trial by judge alone and pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.

THE ISSUES

[4] The main issue to be decided with respect to counts 1-4 is whether the Crown has proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne intended to use the chemicals found in his home to create an explosive substance or that he used them or intended to use them to cause or to aid in causing an explosion on or with an explosive substance.[^4] As a corollary to this main issue, it is also necessary to define the term “explosive substance” for the purposes of s. 82(1) of the Criminal Code. A determination of this issue will require consideration of a number of questions including whether or not Mr. Sonne was in possession of certain chemicals for innocent purposes. No assembled explosives or explosive substances were found in Mr. Sonne’s possession. Subject to one exception, there was, however, not much dispute about the fact that he possessed the various chemicals and related equipment relied upon by the Crown’s expert, Dr. Crawford John Anderson, who opined that these chemicals could be combined in various ways to produce the various explosive substances as pleaded in the indictment.

[5] In summary, the Crown’s evidence with respect to intent is as follows. It is the theory of the Crown that Mr. Sonne started to amass chemicals in January 2010, beginning with potassium permanganate, followed by the ammonium nitrate and hexamine tablets and other chemicals and that he then started making substantial quantities of potassium chlorate in March-April 2010. Mr. Sonne’s obsession with the G20 in May and June 2010 put him under the microscope with the police and Ms. Nadeau submitted that it would have been clear to him then that he would need to come up with an innocent explanation for the chemicals in his home. It is the theory of the Crown that Mr. Sonne realized he needed a cover or alibi and that he decided that cover would be that the potassium chlorate was intended to make rocket fuel. Ms. Nadeau’s submission is that Mr. Sonne never had a real interest in rocketry. She argued that this would explain why there is no evidence of any other rocket parts in Mr. Sonne’s home or any designs of rockets or documents with respect to rockets, why his chats as a member of a club called Hacklab, concerning rocketry, are in May and June 2010, why websites like the Canadian Association of Rocketry (“CAR”) and the North American Propulsion and Aerospace Society (“NAPAS”) were not bookmarked on Mr. Sonne’s computer until June 2010 and why Mr. Sonne joined CAR and NAPAS before he even had a rocket. It is the position of the Crown that all of this was part of an elaborate alibi to provide an innocent explanation for why Mr. Sonne had these chemicals in his home. Ms. Nadeau adopted the opinion of Dr. Anderson that the only reasonable inference to be drawn from all of the evidence is that Mr. Sonne was intending to make at least some of the explosive substances pleaded. She submitted that the Crown’s case was strongest with respect to counts 3 and 4, namely explosive substances made with urea nitrate, ammonium nitrate and potassium chlorate.

[6] Mr. Di Luca submitted that there are two explanations for why Mr. Sonne had such a variety of chemicals in his possession. The first is that the chemicals were intended to be used for innocent purposes. For example, potassium chlorate was being produced as rocket fuel as part of Mr. Sonne’s growing interest in amateur rocketry. Mr. Di Luca presented Mr. Sonne as a layered, intelligent, skilled individual with a multitude of interests who had a legitimate interest in amateur rocketry and in particular, high powered rockets which explains the presence of the electrochemical cell that he was using to make potassium chlorate found in his workshop. Similarly, the ammonium nitrate could be used as fertilizer. Mr. Di Luca submitted that if Mr. Sonne decided he needed an alibi he would never have gone public in the first place and used his own credit card and home address to purchase the various chemicals found in his home.

[7] The second explanation submitted by Mr. Di Luca is that the chemicals found in his home were intended by Mr. Sonne to “test the system”. He reasoned that you would expect that if Mr. Sonne was trying to raise flags by buying chemicals he would have the precursors to make explosive substances.

[8] In support of this submission, Mr. Di Luca relied in particular on an email exchange Mr. Sonne had with someone named Kate Milberry on April 26, 2010, at a time when he was not under investigation, and in particular Mr. Sonne’s statement that he had ordered lab equipment and chemical precursors “in an attempt to purposefully raise flags and get ‘the man’ to take a look at me”. He submitted that since Mr. Sonne is presumed innocent, the Court must start with addressing this email exchange and see whether or not it explains what Mr. Sonne was doing. He argued that the statement in this email was entirely consistent with the evidence about the groups Mr. Sonne was a member of including Hacklab, Toronto Area Security Klatch (“TASK”) and SecTor and that Mr. Sonne had a genuine interest in surveillance, countersurveillance, security measures and an interest obviously tied to the upcoming G8/G20 Summits. Mr. Di Luca’s position is that Mr. Sonne was testing the system for his own educative, intellectual and personal interest to be shared with a group of like-minded individuals and that he wanted to make a name for himself in this field.

[9] In response to this defence that Mr. Sonne was “testing the system”, Ms. Nadeau submitted that as an intelligent man Mr. Sonne would not actually purchase chemicals, and if he did, he would not take them out of their commercial packaging and store them in hand labelled jars in his lab desk and that in any event, he would have some protection in place, such as a document explaining what he was doing and why, in order to provide what she described as a clear-cut alibi to establish that if he caught the attention of the police what his purpose was.

[10] With respect to count 5; the counselling charge, there is no dispute that Mr. Sonne posted pictures on Flickr showing design flaws in the G20 fences and tweets on how those fences could be scaled or pulled down. The central issue is whether or not the Crown has proven the actus reus of this offence beyond a reasonable doubt, namely that these tweets actively induced persons to scale or pull down the G20 fence, particularly in light of the fact that the Court may not have the complete record of the dialogue with respect to these tweets.

THE EVIDENCE AND PRELIMINARY FINDINGS OF FACT

[11] The Crown’s case relied not only on the physical evidence of the chemicals and equipment seized from Mr. Sonne’s home, but also the considerable evidence seized from the hard drive of Mr. Sonne’s main computer, as well as some of his Visa records. As well, some evidence from the blended voir dire that was heard during the hearing of the many applications in the first four weeks of this trial was agreed to form part of the trial record. In addition, the Crown called Dr. Anderson as an expert witness, the exhibits officer, D.C. Albrecht and re-called D.C. Ouellette who conducted the primary search of Mr. Sonne’s computer. The Crown also tendered two statements given by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui, subject to the portion that was ruled inadmissible in the second statement. Mr. Sonne did call a defence and I heard from a friend of his, Fryderyk Supinski. Mr. Sonne did not testify. As a result of considerable cooperation between counsel, four extensive agreed statements of fact with associated documents were filed.

[12] Because of the nature of the case, a detailed chronology is of assistance in determining what reasonable inferences can be drawn from all of the evidence. That Chronology is found at Schedule “A” to this decision. The facts set out in the Chronology were either expressly agreed to or came from documents admitted on consent and agreed to be authentic. However, statements made by Mr. Sonne in his blog, in chats, on Twitter and Flickr, in emails and in correspondence were not admitted for their truth. A list of the relevant bookmarks, documents and books is found at Schedule “B” with a summary of contents.

Evidence Seized from 58 Elderwood Drive

The Chemicals

[13] The chemicals that the Crown relies upon were found in either the basement workshop or the garage of 58 Elderwood Drive, where Mr. Sonne resided with his wife. It is an agreed fact that the property seized in the workshop and furnace room belonged to Mr. Sonne and not his wife. This admission does not extend to the chemicals and other property seized from the garage. D.C. Albrecht testified as to where the chemicals and some of the property were located before these items were seized by police. Photographs of the inside of the home and garage taken close in time to the start of the execution of the search warrant and of the various items that were tagged and seized were filed.

[14] Photographs showing the garage and workshop before they were searched show a very well organized space. The garage is attached to the home and entry from the garage to the home is through a laundry room. The laundry room opens up into the workshop in the basement which contained what was referred to as a lab desk with some lab equipment on it and a cupboard under that desk, a tall multi-sectioned cabinet next to the lab desk, a workbench where various hand and power tools were found, a shelving unit and a fridge. Most of the chemicals found in the workshop were in the cupboard under the lab desk; most in plastic screw top jars that were hand labelled with their chemical contents. There was also a furnace room where the electrochemical cell was found along with a quantity of potassium chlorate as well as a storage room in the basement.

[15] In the garage there were various gardening tools along one wall as well as lumber and plastic gas containers. There were bicycles on the other wall, and at the back there were shelving units which contained some of the chemicals relied upon by the Crown, in addition to materials related to, among other things, acrylic welding, a large circular saw, a drill press and some other power tools. There was a small workbench in the centre of the garage. The chemicals seized by police from the garage were mostly found on the shelving unit at the back among a lot of products that one would expect to find in a typical garage.

[16] It is important to consider where the various chemicals were found and how they were packaged. For example, chemicals found in their original commercial containers in the garage, which have household purposes, obviously raise fewer questions than chemicals found in the cupboard under Mr. Sonne’s lab desk in his workshop, particularly where the chemical has been moved to a plastic jar and labelled by hand. The quantity of the chemical and, where available, the date of purchase, is also important. In the case of some of the chemicals and other property, the Crown was able to establish when these items were purchased. That information is set out in the Chronology.

The Computer

[17] As the courts have recognized, the search of a personal computer is an extensive invasion of one’s informational privacy. This was true for Mr. Sonne. Detective Constable Ouellette gave evidence about certain items that he found on Mr. Sonne’s computer and, as a result, I have evidence of Mr. Sonne’s tweets on Twitter, the pictures he posted on Flickr, the posts he made on his blog[^5], his chats[^6] and a chain of emails[^7] he participated in as a member of Hacklab, copies of other emails sent and received by Mr. Sonne with various individuals and organizations, his uploads of torrent files[^8] to an Internet site called The Pirate Bay, the bookmarks and folders and documents he had on his computer including the files and books he may have read as a result and a history of some of his online purchases.

[18] Ms. Nadeau submitted that I should draw an adverse inference from the fact that two files on the hard drive of Mr. Sonne’s computer could not be accessed by Corporal Lee and Mr. Letch, suggesting that this portion had been encrypted. The two files suspected to be encrypted are possibly quite large and named after bodies of water by Denmark, presumably because Mr. Sonne is Danish. There was a program called TrueCrypt found on the hard drive but it was not determined that this program created the suspected encrypted files. Mr. Letch has been trying to decrypt these two files for some time without success. Those efforts are apparently ongoing. Ms. Nadeau submitted that we know Mr. Sonne has the skill in hiding things that he doesn’t want people to know of and referred to a Hacklab chat he had on June 5, 2010 with “shaz” when he discussed hiding Internet traffic, hijacking Internet Wi-Fi signals and portscanning government servers and how he usually upped files of “sketchy shit” from his car parked in a quiet neighbourhood after jacking someone’s Wi-Fi. Ms. Nadeau queried what might be in these files given the nature of the documents Mr. Sonne did upload to The Pirate Bay, like Ragnar’s Guide to Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives. She suggested that the encrypted portion could contain plans with respect to use of the bombs.

[19] There are a number of problems with this submission and, in fairness, Ms. Nadeau agreed that the fact there may be encrypted files on Mr. Sonne’s computer is not a strong piece of evidence. It has not been proven that the files are encrypted, at least as I understand the agreed facts. However, the fact Mr. Letch has not been able to view the contents certainly suggests this, particularly as it appears Mr. Sonne had an encryption program on his hard drive. However, even if I were to conclude that Mr. Sonne had encrypted a portion of his hard drive, that does not mean that he did so for nefarious purposes. As I will come to, I have concluded that Mr. Sonne had a genuine interest in security and if there are encrypted files, they could just as easily contain personal financial records. Certainly there is a great deal of information the Crown relies upon concerning explosives that was in plain view on Mr. Sonne’s computer. I, therefore, am not prepared to draw any adverse inference from the fact that Mr. Sonne may have encrypted a portion of his hard drive.

Mr. Sonne’s Statements to Detective Bui

[20] The Crown sought to introduce the statements made by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui on June 23 and 26, 2010. I ruled that the first statement was admissible in its entirety but that only the first portion of the second statement was admissible. This evidence was then tendered as part of the Crown’s case. At the time of the first statement, the charges Mr. Sonne was facing were different but did include weapons dangerous and possession of an explosive substance, although no particular substance was specified. Mr. Sonne knew that his house had been searched and that chemicals had been found. The information provided by Mr. Sonne was largely in response to questions asked by Detective Bui who, at that point, did not have a lot of information about the case in that the police had not had a chance to analyze the chemicals found or conduct the search of Mr. Sonne’s computer. The statements contain explanations or qualifications favourable to Mr. Sonne that bear upon the matters in issue but were not given under oath. These statements by Mr. Sonne are, however, the only evidence that I have from him directly, where I can at least observe his demeanour, as opposed to statements that he made in various forums online. In addition, I was able to make observations of Mr. Sonne on the police videos taken at the time he was detained on June 15, 2010 and when he was arrested.

[21] I will refer to the statements of Mr. Sonne as I review the evidence, and consider the weight to be attached to them when I proceed to my analysis of the evidence and determination of the charges.

Mr. Sonne’s background, interests, hobbies and political views

[22] In deciding this case it is important that I consider the evidence that I have that sheds some light on the kind of person Mr. Sonne is; his background, interests and hobbies, his opinions and political views and anything else that could assist in determining the key issue I must decide of whether or not he had any intention to combine any of the chemicals that he possessed into explosive substances. While such evidence, strictly speaking, pertains to motive and not intention, “as evidence motive is always relevant to the issue of intention …. The existence of a motive makes it more likely that a person committed the crime. Persons do not usually act without a motive.”[^9] The evidence may also help explain why Mr. Sonne had different items in his possession.

[23] In addition to what Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui, the fact that he used his computer extensively has provided me with a lot of information about Mr. Sonne and what he was doing in the months before his arrest. The following is a review of Mr. Sonne’s broad and diverse interests.

Interest in Security Issues

[24] Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he worked in computer security and that he met his wife when he worked for her father’s company which manufactured digital security systems. That business had been sold and, at the time of his arrest, Mr. Sonne was self employed and, with the downturn in the economy, he was not busy. He clearly had time on his hands, at least in the weeks before his arrest. Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he had been working on trying to land two contracts and had been trying to research and find people and get his name out there “by writing papers and presentations about things that are interesting such as things that are germane to the city like the G20.” Mr. Sonne also told Detective Bui that he was a member of TASK, that he was into other security related things and that he was interested in writing about these things and coming up with a good presentation that he could put on at TASK after the G20 and maybe make his name with. He said “look at the cameras. Here they are. They went down. You know, this is what happened. This is what didn’t happen. These are some of the people. This is the kind of stuff you can hear when you hang around with activists. This is exactly how the whole thing was overblown. This is how a city can successfully manage these things.” One of the theories of the Defence is that Mr. Sonne’s interest in the G20 was for the purpose of making a presentation surrounding security issues at the G20. Ms. Nadeau pointed out that there were no notes or any documents that would suggest Mr. Sonne had actually started writing such a paper. He was, however, creating a record of sorts on his computer; for example, by tweeting and posting photographs to Flickr and joining mailing lists and it may be that any interest in doing a paper later overlapped his interest in monitoring the police in the lead up to the G20.

[25] At the time of his arrest Mr. Sonne was licensed as a Security Guard and as a Private Investigator by the Province of Ontario. He obtained his designation, like his friend Mr. Supinski, as a Certified Information System Security Professional (“CISSP”) in May 2009. Mr. Supinski testified that the process of becoming certified takes five years of practice in the information security industry followed by a written examination. To maintain the certification you have to continue to earn credits with security related courses which can include attending conferences hosted by TASK and SecTor.

[26] Mr. Supinski met Mr. Sonne four to five years ago at a TASK meeting. He described TASK as an organization of individuals who share an interest in security. Monthly meetings take place and there are typically two presentations at those meetings followed by a period of networking. The topics are on a vast variety of security related subjects including privacy, law enforcement, and information security. According to Mr. Supinski it is a privilege to present at TASK and he believes the fact he has done so assisted him in establishing his reputation for knowledge in the industry. Mr. Supinski described SecTor as an annual security education conference held in Toronto, organized by founders of TASK, which brings together security professionals from all over the world.

[27] Mr. Sonne was a member of TASK and there is evidence that he spoke at a security conference and then at TASK in the fall of 2009 on the subject of RF CounterSurveillance. A document from Mr. Sonne’s computer that appears to be speaking notes on the subject was introduced into evidence and appears to be a legitimate presentation related to the use of scanners to monitor radio frequencies. Although it addresses the legal issues in Canada, the focus of the presentation is on the security concerns raised by the use of radio frequency communications in the average business or enterprise and how those could be intercepted by scanners for improper purposes. Suggestions were made as to how to address those concerns. As set out in the Chronology it seems that Mr. Sonne also attended several security conferences with SecTor and DefCon and other organizations in the months leading up to his arrest.

[28] All of this evidence suggests that Mr. Sonne had a legitimate interest in security issues and was looking for work in this field. Given the considerable effort involved to obtain a certification as a CISSP, it seems reasonable that Mr. Sonne would want to maintain this certification and based on the evidence, his interest in writing papers for TASK presentations was legitimate to further his employment prospects.

Interest in Electronics

[29] Mr. Sonne described himself to Detective Bui as an electronics engineering technologist by trade and there was some reference to this being from a college. On all of the evidence it is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Sonne had a hobby interest in electronics as Mr. Supinski testified that he and Mr. Sonne had developed closer ties while they were both members of “Hacklab;” a group of about 30 people who lease space that members can use for a monthly fee. Although one meaning of the term “hacker” is to describe individuals who are trying to intrude on computer systems, Mr. Supinski was very firm in saying that persons with that intent are not permitted to join Hacklab, that both safety and abiding by the law are important to Hacklab members and that members of Hacklab were not doing dangerous experiments and did not want to have a reputation of being “bad hackers”. Individuals who are members of this group are those who want to share in technology-related projects and build or repair electronics or work on other projects. Members will have their own project or brainstorm ideas for group projects or help someone with their project. In the leased space there are work areas and various tools including soldering irons, a laser engraver, two 3D printers and anything that you might need to work with electronics. Mr. Supinski described projects such as increasing the speed of a laser engraver and designing a hardware component that tweets a message to the Internet when a toilet is flushed. He characterized these as “fun little things”. Although I expect many people would not find this sort of project amusing, this does appear to be the type of project that would amuse Mr. Sonne. In March 2009, he blogged on his Toronto Goat blog that he was a member of this “very cool thing called Hacklab.to.” and referred to the fact that two members got a “busted laser etcher” to work and how they had posted a blog of this. He described it as a “mothafuckin’ tour-de-force of hackery. It doesn’t get too much better!”

[30] Mr. Sonne’s interest in electronics is also clear from his Toronto Goat blog about his experiment to make a magnetron/wave guide in the period February to June 2009 as detailed in the Chronology. Ms. Nadeau submitted that the magnetron experiment shows Mr. Sonne’s dedication to projects of somewhat questionable motives. She relied on the first blog in late February 2009, in which Mr. Sonne queried the ability to build a device capable of burning out communication systems. On the last day of the blog Mr. Sonne posted a number of photographs of antennas which suggested that his original intent was real. There is no doubt, however, that at the time of Mr. Sonne’s arrest, the project was still shelved as he said on his last blog on June 21, 2009, and the magnetron was found disassembled in the workshop. In a file box inside a cupboard in the office, a file marked “microwave/magnetron experiments” was found containing a number of files detailing that microwave device.

Interest in “Tinkering”

[31] Mr. Sonne described himself in an email as an extreme do-it-yourselfer and Mr. Di Luca submitted that he is a “tinkerer.” There is evidence that supports this submission. Although as Ms. Nadeau submitted, Mr. Sonne bought potato cannons online, rather than building them, the photographs show how he experimented with them; shooting candles and shallots through particle board and noting the effects.[^10] Based on Mr. Sonne’s blog about his magnetron experiment and his comments about various electronics issues in the Hacklab chats and emails, there is no doubt that Mr. Sonne’s interest in electronics and tinkering continued during the months leading to his arrest. Mr. Supinski testified that he would see Mr. Sonne at the Hacklab space on a weekly basis and that some days it seemed as though Mr. Sonne lived there. This could explain some of the tools and other items found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop and the garage. In fact, the number of power tools and regular tools that were in the garage and workshop suggests that Mr. Sonne may have worked with wood to build things or make home repairs. Indeed, one of his bookmarks suggests an interest in wood and boats.

Interest in Chemistry

[32] Although there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne had any training as a chemist, he clearly had some interests in chemistry; making blue crystals from copper sulphate for one and the electrochemical cell for another. He was truthful when he told Detective Bui that he was using copper sulphate to grow blue crystals and that the beakers on the lab desk were for this purpose. This has been corroborated not only by Dr. Anderson’s evidence but also the photographs on Flickr. It is reasonable to infer that Mr. Sonne had learned enough about chemicals to be able to correctly label the various jars of chemicals that he had in his workshop, not only with their chemical name but also, in many cases, with the correct nomenclature.

[33] As I will come to, Mr. Sonne had experimented with at least three different electrochemical cells and successfully made potassium chlorate. Although Mr. Supinski believed that he had some help from a member of Hacklab who had knowledge as a chemist, based on what Mr. Sonne was posting on the Hacklab chats and in the emails about what he was doing and certain chemicals mentioned in the chats, he seemed fairly knowledgeable about chemicals and their potential uses. It is reasonable to infer from this evidence that Mr. Sonne had the necessary skill to work with the chemicals he had to make explosive substances if that were his intent, with or without the help from the Hacklab member that Mr. Supinski believed was assisting him.

Interest in Explosions and Explosives

[34] Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Sonne had an obsession with explosions. I have only four days of Hacklab chats as selected by the Defence and she submitted that on those four days Mr. Sonne talked about explosions nine separate times, including a discussion on May 29, 2010 that included a discussion about TATP. Mr. Sonne, however, was not the only person involved in these chats, and it is not surprising that explosions would be of interest to members of a club like Hacklab; Mr. Supinski said that they were “cool”. According to Mr. Supinski, he spoke to Mr. Sonne about explosions and he admitted that they were a frequent topic of conversation on the Hacklab chats.

[35] Although I would not conclude that Mr. Sonne was obsessed with explosions, it would be fair to say he was fascinated by them. However, that in and of itself, in my view is hardly evidence of someone who might be inclined to make an explosive substance, particularly someone like Mr. Sonne with an interest in chemicals. I can take judicial notice of the fact that there was, for example, a great deal of news reported about the Sunrise Propane explosion; clearly explosions are newsworthy. Furthermore, as Mr. Di Luca submitted, the discussion on the Hacklab chat was not about advocating the use of explosives as much as discussing how dangerous these chemicals are. Mr. Sonne commented about TATP production being the stupidest thing someone could do and mocked someone who would smash a beaker of it. The chat suggests he knew what TATP was and that he recognized the danger in these substances. I agree with Mr. Di Luca that it does not suggest Mr. Sonne had a desire to personally use an explosive substance to blow things up.

[36] Ms. Nadeau also submitted that explosives would be within the top five of ten of Mr. Sonne’s interests. In considering Mr. Sonne’s interests and views in this regard, I have considered the substantial amount of evidence about information on Mr. Sonne’s computer which included documents uploaded to The Pirate Bay[^11], user-created bookmarks[^12] and documents on his computer. The documents uploaded to The Pirate Bay include Ragnar’s Guide to Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives, uploaded in September 2009, which appears to be a book Mr. Sonne ordered from Amazon, with the comment that it was rumoured to be out of circulation but that he did not believe it was illegal, and a file called Setting Fires with Electrical Timers which he uploaded on January 1, 2009, with the comment “Please, education purposes only … don’t be one of these idiots that goes out and hurts people. Support Freedom of Speech!”

[37] Based on the evidence of Dr. Anderson, both of these documents assist in making improvised explosive devices and one would query the wisdom of further putting them out in the public domain. The Ragnar’s Guide is of particular concern as, according to Dr. Anderson, there are some significant correlations with what is in this book and what he saw from the evidence in terms of the chemicals available in Mr. Sonne’s home. This book contains detailed information on how to make explosive substances. However, the evidence of Dr. Anderson is also clear that the Internet has all of the information needed to make explosive substances so it is not as if Mr. Sonne was disclosing some sort of State secret.

[38] Mr. Sonne’s posting of these documents on The Pirate Bay may also be consistent with the fact that Mr. Sonne is someone who likes to test the limits of authority and is a strong supporter of freedom of speech. As he said in an email on November 4, 2009, “either you’re free to traffic in the worst shit imaginable or you’re not free at all”. In the email to Kate Milberry on April 26, 2010, Mr. Sonne stated that he kept torrents going of matters of interest to counter-surveillance and activist security culture, and some other “sketchy stuff” that he monitored to see how active it would get as various political situations arose and that he had concluded that governments survey the Internet to see what’s out there and who might be looking at it. This is consistent with a possible paper/presentation on security issues.

[39] As set out in Schedule “B”, there are almost 300 files that were first created on Mr. Sonne’s computer on January 5, 2009 that are all similar in nature and are based on military practices and training. Many of these documents include information on explosives, rockets that are used as weapons and incendiaries. Given when these documents were first created on Mr. Sonne’s computer and the nature of these documents, they were likely not related to any interest in hobby rockets, although both D.C. Ouellette and Mr. Supinski testified that the principles would be the same. Mr. Supinski testified that a lot of information about rockets used as weapons could be applied to non-weaponized rockets. I find it most likely, given the vast array of topics of the other documents and bookmarks, that these documents reflect an interest Mr. Sonne had in the American and Canadian military field and technical manuals and military history and that it is not reasonable to conclude that these documents were downloaded as a result of an interest in explosives. However, it is fair to say that if Mr. Sonne read these documents they would have advanced his knowledge of explosives, rockets and incendiaries. The fact he referred to the Home Depot pail containing potassium chlorate that was found buried in his backyard as a “storage magazine” supports the fact that he was at least generally conversant with some of these documents.

[40] On the whole, based on the documents uploaded to The Pirate Bay and those on Mr. Sonne’s computer either as documents or as bookmarked, Mr. Sonne clearly had an interest in the subject of explosives and easy access to the knowledge to make the explosive substances pleaded in the indictment. This is corroborated by his knowledge of explosives as expressed on the Hacklab chats. I find that Mr. Sonne had ready access to the “recipes” and techniques to make the various explosive substances set out in the indictment and that given his intelligence and proficiency in making potassium chlorate, he had the necessary knowledge and skill to assemble the explosive substances set out in the indictment.

Interest in Reading

[41] Ms. Nadeau also led some evidence about Mr. Sonne’s choice of reading material generally. He uploaded a copy of the Turner Diaries to The Pirate Bay on August 16, 2009 and D.C. Ouellette testified that the Turner Diaries were connected to the Oklahoma City bomber. In my view, this piece of evidence is completely irrelevant. As Mr. Di Luca observed, the fact Mr. Sonne may have had an interest in writings that leave others uncomfortable, and some of which might be considered taboo, if we are to be free in this country that freedom gets tested in the margins where people are collecting these kinds of books. It should not, in the circumstances of someone with a broad range of interests, be considered a piece of circumstantial evidence. Looking at the hard copy books in Mr. Sonne’s home that can be seen from the photographs taken before the search and the bookmarked files on Mr. Sonne’s computer, he clearly had broad and varied interests that he read about or researched on his computer that, for the most part, were not related to a particular interest in explosives.

Interest in Air Rifles

[42] Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Sonne had a fascination bordering on an obsession with guns. I do not accept that submission; on this evidence this was simply another example of Mr. Sonne’s many interests. In any event, any interest in guns that Mr. Sonne had appears to have been primarily in air rifles for hunting, not for any nefarious purpose. Mr. Sonne volunteered to Detective Bui just before he was shown a photograph of four air rifles in a closet, not only what they were but why they were there. He told Detective Bui that they had not been modified, that he owned them because he liked shooting tin cans at the cottage, that they were at home because he wanted to work on them over the winter, and so they would not get rusty. The posting of photographs on Flickr of a worn piston and the new piston from an air rifle would support this. It is true that Mr. Sonne had a lot of bookmarked articles on air rifles and how to turn them into semi-automatic rifles, but there is no evidence of any attempt to do so or that that would be illegal, nor is there any suggestion that it was illegal for Mr. Sonne to possess the air rifles. Considering all of the evidence, I find that Mr. Sonne’s interest in guns was not nefarious or in any way connected to the allegations before the Court.

[43] Mr. Sonne applied for and had obtained a licence to possess a firearm in the months before his arrest but there is no evidence that he had acquired one. In fact, Mr. Sonne recognized he would be subject to an RCMP check to obtain this licence which is hardly the action of someone who would want to keep a low profile if he intended on building bombs. Based on the chats set out in the Chronology, his intended purpose for obtaining a firearm was for hunting.

Interest in Gardening

[44] It is important to review the evidence that supports the statement of Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui that he had ammonium nitrate and urea for use as a fertilizer in his vegetable garden. He told Detective Bui that if he looked in his yard he would see how he had various plots of corn, beans and plants laid out and that each one of those was to be fertilized with a specific fertilizer so that he could see the difference it made for yet another paper or just his own edification.

[45] In Mr. Sonne’s workshop, near his workbench, the photographs taken before the search show several paper packages of seeds; the top one is labelled herbs. On the bulletin board above the workbench, two Ziploc bags containing what appear to be seeds removed from a vegetable are tacked to the board. When Detective Bui showed Mr. Sonne photographs of these seeds, Mr. Sonne responded that they were squash and corn seeds and that he is an amateur farmer. In a close-up photo it is clear that the paper behind these bags relates to “Sister Corn” and what appears to be a drawing of a plant and some information about plants and so this statement appears to be true. There were also a number of bookmarks that relate to plants under the “Firearms, hunting, survival and military” folder. Ms. Nadeau submitted that for the bookmarks on farming, nothing was added after November 2008 but this does not mean that Mr. Sonne did not have a continuing interest in gardening or amateur farming. Although the police had an opportunity to search the backyard when the original search was executed, there is no evidence that was done and, therefore, no evidence to contradict Mr. Sonne’s statement that he had a garden. In light of the physical evidence consistent with the presence of a vegetable garden, it is reasonable to conclude that Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui that he had a vegetable garden was true.

Interest in Camping and Fishing

[46] In addition to the camping gear in the workshop and storage room, which would suggest an interest in camping, Mr. Sonne appears to have had an interest in fishing. A fishing rod was found near the camping supplies and a business card for a fishing supply store was on the bulletin board in Mr. Sonne’s office provides support for Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui that he goes fishing at his cottage.

Interest in Rocketry and Pyrotechnics

[47] There is evidence of Mr. Sonne having an interest in amateur rocketry, particularly in May and June 2010. As I have stated, whether this interest was real and explains the presence of the electrochemical cell and potassium chlorate is one of the main issues to be determined in this trial. I will deal with this issue when I consider count 4.

[48] As set out in the Chronology, as of June 9, 2010, there does, however, seem to have been a late-blooming interest in pyrotechnics which could have been, as Mr. Di Luca submitted, a natural progression from rocketry or at least is evidence of yet another interest. On June 18, 2010, just a couple of days before his arrest, Mr. Sonne purchased zinc oxide and red iron oxide and uploaded a file onto The Pirate Bay entitled “Practical Pyrotechniques by Buto Visser” with the comment that it is a “de facto standard for beginning pyrotechnicians”. Dr. Anderson testified that zinc oxide is not relevant to explosives but can be used to generate smoke in fireworks and so it seems likely that this interest in pyrotechnics was real; there was no need for a “cover” for these chemicals.

Interests in the G20 and Anarchism

[49] Ms. Nadeau submitted that in the months leading to his arrest there was a change in Mr. Sonne that should cause the Court concern. He told Detective Bui that he had voted for Prime Minister Harper, and she referred to evidence on Twitter when in May 2009, Mr. Sonne made disparaging comments about the Tamil protestors and that he liked “messing with protestors.” She also suggested there was evidence Mr. Sonne had become paranoid based on a Hacklab chat he had on January 14, 2010. Although Ms. Nadeau recognizes political freedom, she submitted that Mr. Sonne became obsessed with the G20 and his political views swung to that of an anarchist. She also submitted however, that the evidence does not show that Mr. Sonne was really political but rather that he was looking for an outlet for his desire to “stick it to the system”.

[50] Although Ms. Nadeau rightly pointed out that she did not need to prove that Mr. Sonne had a particular plan to use an explosive substance at the G20, or anywhere else, she did rely on this alleged change in political views and his interest in the G20 in support of her argument as to Mr. Sonne’s intent with respect to the explosive substance counts. Implicit in these submissions was the suggestion that Mr. Sonne had a reason to inflict damage at the G20 by way of an attack using an explosive substance. Although Ms. Nadeau did suggest the possibility that Mr. Sonne had some of these explosive substances to blow a hole in the G20 fence, that seems inconsistent with the overall theory of the Crown that he had amassed enough chemicals to make six different explosive substances that could cause substantial damage and injury.

[51] There are a number of comments made by Mr. Sonne, as set out in the Chronology, to the effect that he was “strongly anarchist” in the months leading up to his arrest and in one comment he described this as a shift from being a Liberal. How this can be reconciled with voting for Mr. Harper is hard to say. In a Freenode chat on March 22, 2010, Mr. Sonne described himself as “less liberal nowadays, more anarchist” and he went on to comment that an “armed discussion group is a polite discussion group”. That, however, was in the context of a discussion about air rifles and firearms so I do not consider this comment to be serious, particularly given my conclusion that Mr. Sonne’s interest in firearms was for hunting. As Ms. Nadeau fairly acknowledged Mr. Sonne was probably joking when he made this statement. In his email to Kate Milberry of April 26, 2010, Mr. Sonne described his politics as “strongly anarchist and I’m an ex-commie”.

[52] I have considered the chat Mr. Sonne had with “aonomus” on January 14, 2010 which is summarized in the Chronology. The topics of discussion were quite varied. I would not conclude, taken in context, that they suggested paranoia on Mr. Sonne’s part. The comments relied upon by the Crown do not appear to have been made seriously. It is of note that there was some suggestion in the chat that is consistent with Mr. Sonne wanting to test the system as he queried whether or not he would get a licence for a firearm given some disclosure he had made of a health issue. As for the Tamil protestors, I would not take those comments seriously.

[53] Mr. Sonne sent a mass email to the members of the Hacklab discussion group on November 4, 2009 on the subject of “tickling the dragon” (the “Tickling the Dragon email”). He said he was feeling in a civilly disobedient mood, “but what’s new about that” and that email did go on to suggest that he wanted to provoke a government response by something that was “almost guaranteed to be illegal right off the bat.” When asked about this comment, Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Supinski went to great pains to seize on the word “almost” to suggest that Mr. Sonne had no intention of doing anything illegal but I would not say that is necessarily an unfair characterization of the comment, particularly given that Mr. Sonne added that the action would have to be “relatively morally clean”. There are, however, a couple of other occasions when Mr. Sonne suggested that he did not care if some activity might be illegal. For example, in his post on the Hacklab chat on May 18, 2010, in response to Mr. Supinski’s advice that he needed certification for larger motors, Mr. Sonne initially said that it was “only illegal if you get caught”. However, in the same chat he said that proceeding with certification was probably a good idea. There are, as well, pictures of police officers that Mr. Sonne posted on Flickr with derogatory terms such as “bacon on wheels”.

[54] Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he didn’t like how the G20 had made his city into a sort of “prison camp” but at the same time it was a democratic establishment. He said he wished it had been done a little more openly but didn’t have anything against any of the leaders. When asked if he supported the security establishment in Toronto, namely the police and the security effort, he answered that he had always been respectful to officers and that he had only been documenting it to look at it because it was interesting. This statement to Detective Bui is consistent with the evidence I have as to what happened when Mr. Sonne actually came into contact with the police; he was polite and respectful. Although I do not have the words that were spoken from the video when Mr. Sonne was detained by police officers on June 15, 2010, there is no suggestion that he was aggressive towards the officers or disrespectful, nor did any of the officers that interacted with him suggest otherwise. Similarly, in the video taken at the time of Mr. Sonne’s arrest, Mr. Sonne is polite and respectful. Throughout the interviews by Detective Bui, Mr. Sonne was very respectful and responsive to most of his questions. He referred to Detective Bui as “Sir” throughout and even apologized when he used mildly offensive language. He did not behave with police as some of his language in the Tickling the Dragon email might suggest. Before his arrest, there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne was not a law abiding citizen. It seems his anarchist sentiments were aimed more at government censorship and invasions of privacy.

[55] As set out in the Chronology, Mr. Sonne was on the mailing list for SAN, a student activist network, a surveillance club and the Toronto Community Mobilization Network (“TCMN”) which had called various open meetings in the months leading up to the G8/G20 to discuss various forms of action against the Summits. Ms. Nadeau queried why, with the G20 approaching, Mr. Sonne would join student activist groups. She submitted that the TCMN was an anarchist organization and relied on some of the emails that are set out in the Chronology, for example the mass email on April 9, 2010 which gave notice of a meeting to be held to discuss “the black bloc and diversity of tactics” and an email on April 13, 2010 that was “a call to disrupt and shut down the places, the systems and the ideas that exploit and exclude us” and included recognition of the fact people may have different needs regarding safety, including the need to be supported if arrested. Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Sonne knew what was implied with respect to tactics and arrests that left little to the imagination. She also relied on an email dated April 22, 2010 from Mr. Sonne to the Hacklab discussion group, where he referred to the G8/G20 meetings/riots coming to Toronto. Ms. Nadeau submitted that at the time the average citizen was not anticipating riots even though the police may have been. Mr. Di Luca submitted that the contrary was true. I have no evidence of this one way or the other.

[56] However, in terms of what Mr. Sonne believed and when, which is the relevant question, in a Freenode chat on December 14, 2009, he responded to a question asking if he had any read on how badly the G20 protests were going to go by stating that he didn’t know for sure being Canada is said to “half expect total anarchy and politeness at the same time” but that he had read somewhere that some anarchists were planning on some “militant confrontation” and that there would definitely be “some beat downs”.

[57] The fact Mr. Sonne was expecting riots at the G20 does not mean that he intended to participate in them. I have no evidence about the activities of the TCMN save the emails which suggest that there were a broad range of persons on the mailing list. Although there is some evidence that Black Bloc tactics were going to be discussed at one of the TCMN meetings, there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne supported those tactics or attended any of the open meetings, let alone that particular one. Although, as set out in the Chronology, Mr. Sonne ordered some first aid supplies on June 22, 2010, in an email to Norman Chu who appears to have been sharing in the order, he stated that he did not know when the shipment would arrive. I find it unlikely that this purchase had anything to do with the G8/G20.

[58] In the email to Kate Milberry on April 26, 2010, Mr. Sonne stated that he had been monitoring most of the social action lists such as SAN and that he was not very impressed. He went on to question the technical merits and skills of the people involved in these groups and told Ms. Milberry that he had tried to volunteer to educate and train people. An intention of monitoring these groups could have been Mr. Sonne’s purpose in joining the mailing lists and this would tie in to preparing a paper on security issues and the G20.

[59] Mr. Sonne’s interests in the G20 however, clearly went well beyond joining the email lists for these various groups. In an email to TCMN on December 23, 2009, Mr. Sonne stated he would like to attend some of the TCMN meetings or at least pursue the information and be of some use. He advised that he was currently working on a project to assemble textual, visual and logistical information about the locations of the G8 and G20 to be released as a package into the public domain and that he was working on setting up a communications network to assist protestors in staying safe and to help ensure that police and security monitoring were under control. Mr. Di Luca submitted that the effect of this email was Mr. Sonne publicly identifying himself and effectively saying the police ought to be watched and that was what he was trying to do. He submitted this does ring true and maybe this was exactly what Mr. Sonne was trying to do.

[60] There is other evidence that supports this submission. In an email on January 14, 2010, to the head of the media and communications committee of TCMN, Mr. Sonne asked if there were any particular skills they were in need of and advised he had been working on teaching people about various technical communication issues and that with the G8/G20 there might be an opportunity to apply some of it: “Whether it’s as simple as making sure police abuses are documented and communicated or helping word get around, etc.” In a Freenode chat on March 1, 2010, following comments about an article in the Toronto Star about the downtown becoming a fortress for the G20, Mr. Sonne stated that he was trying to figure out some way to help other than to film it “to make sure the security doesn’t get too kent-state on people”. In the April 22, 2010 email to the Hacklab discussion group already referred to, Mr. Sonne tried to recruit Hacklab members for the G20 and stated he was hoping to partner with people to help monitor the police “visually and RF wise and to document and disseminate the results.” He stated he would be videotaping and monitoring but the process of doing that would be pretty intense and that he wanted to know if anyone would like to help out with processing video and audio and retransmitting it, tweeting it out, etc. “This is not without risk, so no half-milers please”. I attribute this last comment to concern about being caught up in any riots as what Mr. Sonne was asking members to help with ought not to have resulted in arrests.

[61] In summary, there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne did any more than offer to provide some assistance to TCMN to assist protestors in staying safe and help ensure that the police and security monitoring were under control.

[62] Ms. Nadeau also relied on the fact Mr. Sonne took a large number of photographs of the G20 security cameras which he posted to Flickr. D.C. Ouellette testified that making note of where security cameras are if one is planning action or attack is something, that he has learned through his training, that is used by those involved in activism and counterintelligence as a preamble to an attack. I have reviewed the evidence with respect to this issue in connection with count 5. There are some examples of Mr. Sonne making a point of posting comments as to where certain cameras were pointed so that protestors could practice good “security culture.” For example, in a tweet on June 20, 2010, Ms. Sonne referred to a security camera pointed at the 1266 Queen convergence space and commented that people should practice “good security culture” and he posted a link to the Security Culture Handbook. On the same day he posted a photograph of a very small camera on the Hilton where a large number of internationally protected persons including members of State were going to stay. Ms. Nadeau submitted that it was puzzling why peaceful protestors would be concerned about cameras if it was police behaviour they were concerned about, but that does not mean that Mr. Sonne was endorsing the use of illegal tactics. As for his reference to the Security Culture Handbook, security culture in that handbook is described as the culture where the people know their rights and assert them. A number of Mr. Sonne’s tweets in this timeframe advocate that people “know their rights”. There is no evidence that Mr. Sonne attended any meeting of the TCMN where Black Bloc or other tactics were being advocated. Mr. Sonne’s stated interest in the G20 security cameras was also consistent with his interest in keeping police and security monitoring under control and ensuring that the security cameras were taken down after the G20 and not used for new police monitoring.

[63] A number of lanyards with convention passes were tacked to the bulletin board and on June 15, 2010, Mr. Sonne tweeted asking that someone who was a resident or worked in the G20 zone post a picture of the pass that would get them behind “the line” and that they edit out their details so they would not get caught. This caused the police some concern, particularly as on his Toronto Goat blog Mr. Sonne had experimented with removing plastic from passes. This experiment, however, is consistent with someone who is interested in security issues and there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne made any attempts to actually duplicate a pass to the secured area. When Detective Bui asked Mr. Sonne if he was intending on trying to create a pass, he emphatically denied it although he did respectfully agree that he could see how someone could draw that conclusion. Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that this tweet asking for a copy of a pass was not because he wanted to create one, rather that he wanted to see what one looked like. It was strictly curiosity because billions of dollars were being spent and he wanted to see if the pass was some “little photocopy piece of crap”. This explanation is consistent with Mr. Sonne’s interest in security issues and the money being spent on G20 security.

[64] Ms. Nadeau also relied on the fact that when Mr. Sonne was arrested he had a piece of paper dealing with a terrorism section of the Criminal Code and a scanner. There was no suggestion that the scanner was illegal although it was seized when Mr. Sonne was arrested. Possession of the scanner was consistent with Mr. Sonne’s stated intention of monitoring the police and the presentation he had prepared and presented on countersurveillance. As for the piece of paper, it was a paragraph from an Internet article posted by the G8/G20 Community Solidarity Network on the TCMN website which purported to quote from Jennifer Wispinski, with the Law and Government Division of the Parliamentary Information and Research Service referring to section 83.3 of the Criminal Code “which governs preventative arrests and permits a police officer to arrest a person without warrant and detain that person in custody if the person with the officer suspects on reasonable grounds that detention is necessary in order to prevent a terrorist activity.”

[65] When asked about this, Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that it was something he had found online because he was reading about people “getting beaten downtown just for taking pictures”. Given that Mr. Sonne had been detained unlawfully on June 15, 2010 and, based on his tweets, had been stopped and questioned by police again on June 20, 2010, just for taking pictures near the G20 fence line, it is hardly surprising that he would know his rights and have this kind of information available to him. I find nothing suspicious about this. Mr. Sonne clearly realized that by taking pictures of the G20 fence line he was attracting the attention of the police and, as an intelligent man, one would expect him to be prepared. However, he did emphatically deny that he was intending on getting arrested, when asked by Detective Bui.

[66] I have already concluded that Mr. Sonne’s posting of certain documents on The Pirate Bay may be consistent with the fact that he is someone who likes to test the limits of authority and is a strong supporter of freedom of speech. I conclude that even as someone who characterized himself as being strongly anarchist, there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne ever had any intention to break the law at the G20 by engaging in some of the more extreme activities that may have been advocated by some members of organizations like TCMN. Although he may have been more active than the average citizen in the lead up to the G20, there is no evidence to suggest that any negative feelings he had about holding the G20 in Toronto and turning Toronto into a “prison camp” were strong enough to give him a motive to do actual damage at the G20. He did appear to resent excessive authority and at times may have wanted to test the limits of what is lawful, but there is no evidence that at any time he, in fact, did anything that was unlawful or could have resulted in him being lawfully arrested prior to his arrest for the offences before this Court.

Conclusion on Mr. Sonne’s Interests and Political Views

[67] To the extent I am equipped to come to any conclusion about Mr. Sonne as a person, I would say that having considered all of the evidence available about him, he is clearly an intelligent man and a methodical man who likes organization. He had a large number of varied and wide ranging interests from gardening to camping to potato cannons and air rifles and reading an extensive range of material, some of which could be considered taboo. His hobbies ranged from gardening to working with wood; from electronics to growing blue crystals. He was a tinkerer and a “hacker”, in the sense of the word used by Mr. Supinski. Mr. Sonne is clearly technologically advanced in computer use and computer security related issues and he had a number of like-minded friends whom he chatted with online. Although I would have to conclude that Mr. Sonne was intellectually capable of committing the offences he has been charged with, there is nothing from the evidence concerning his interests, hobbies or political views that would suggest that he had any particular inclination or motive to combine any chemicals in his possession into explosive substances. His political views and these varied interests, however, may shed some light on some of his statements and the presence of certain chemicals and equipment in his home, which will assist in determining these charges.

Opinion Evidence of Dr. Anderson - General

[68] Dr. Anderson, currently the Head of the Military Engineering Section of Defence Research and Development Canada, gave evidence on behalf of the Crown. Dr. Anderson is highly qualified in his field; his CV is very impressive. His expertise was not challenged by the Defence and I qualified him to give opinion evidence on the subjects of organic chemistry and homemade explosive devices. In giving his opinion evidence, Dr. Anderson relied on photographs of what was seized from 58 Elderwood Drive and the report of Gavin Edmonstone, a forensic chemist, dated December 15, 2010. It was admitted that the chemicals seized from the home were of the nature and quantity described in Mr. Edmonstone’s report.

[69] Dr. Anderson’s credibility and the reliability of his evidence about the nature of the chemicals and the composition of the various explosive substances pleaded in the indictment were not really challenged by the Defence. He testified that the different chemicals that were found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop or the garage would all be considered “precursor” materials and that none were explosive on their own. He gave an opinion that “in the big picture”, in considering the equipment that is necessary to process the chemicals a certain way and the presence of the chemicals themselves, that he could think of no other reason why Mr. Sonne would have all of these chemicals other than to make some sort of improvised explosive. That opinion was challenged in cross-examination as Mr. Copeland’s questions were directed primarily to possible innocent explanations for the chemicals and other equipment found in Mr. Sonne’s home and Mr. Sonne’s defence that some of the chemicals could be used for rocketry, pyrotechnics and other hobbies.

[70] Dr. Anderson repeatedly advised the Court that he was not very familiar with rocket engines for the rocketry hobby and that he tends to “blow things up, not launch them.” He said that he has a general knowledge as opposed to an expert knowledge with respect to propellants. In her closing submissions Ms. Nadeau submitted that Dr. Anderson’s evidence about the possibility of something being used as a propellant could not be seen as expert evidence and that I should assign very little weight to the responses that were so speculative in nature. She submitted that there has been no expert evidence on rocket fuel. However, this limitation was acknowledged when Dr. Anderson gave evidence and both Ms. Nadeau and Mr. Copeland asked Dr. Anderson questions on the subject of rocketry in the hope of eliciting favourable evidence from him. It was clear that given Dr. Anderson’s extensive qualifications in organic chemistry, and given the overlap in the use of chemicals for propellants and explosives, that Dr. Anderson was able to give some reliable expert evidence on the subject of propellants and hence rocketry. He was always very fair in stating when he felt some uncertainty about his answer to a particular question and I would not characterize his answers on this subject as speculation. Although I will be mindful of his stated limitations when weighing his evidence, I have concluded that I should consider his evidence on the subject of propellants and rocketry both as elicited by Ms. Nadeau and by Mr. Copeland.

[71] As I will come to, one issue I must determine is how to define the term “explosive substance” as set out in section 82(1) of the Criminal Code. This is a matter of law but to the extent that Dr. Anderson gave evidence that assists in determining how the term ought to be defined, I have considered this.

[72] Dr. Anderson did make distinctions between explosives and propellants which could be used for rockets. For an explosive event to occur, you need an initiation system, typically based on a detonator and a main charge. A detonator is the entire package that contains a small amount of an explosive substance that, when set off, delivers a sufficient shock to set off the explosive that is the “main charge”. He said, however, you have to separate explosions from detonations. A house that fills with gas can explode but that is not a detonation. A pipe bomb filled with black powder will explode and blow apart but not burn at a detonation rate. From his perspective, an explosive must be detonated.

[73] Dr. Anderson said that a propellant is a substance that undergoes a chemical reaction and releases energy and, like an explosive, it releases a pressurized gas in one direction that propels an object. A propellant has the ability to detonate and explode so it must be shaped and the interior core of the propellant must be designed to allow for the controlled burn rate that is necessary for a controlled thrust. It is possible, if you are not careful in terms of formulation and the configuration, for a propellant, rather than burning nice and evenly, to burn to detonation. In other words, the intended use of a propellant is that it not explode, but rather provide a controlled thrust. I will come back to this distinction. Dr. Anderson agreed that there is some crossover in the types of materials that are suitable for use as propellants and explosives and that fact is clear considering his evidence about some of the chemicals found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop. The same organic materials can be used as a fuel in a propellant or as a fuel for an explosive substance. Given the crossover in the types of chemicals that Dr. Anderson spoke to, I found this evidence with respect to propellants to be reliable.

[74] In Dr. Anderson’s opinion there were more than enough materials in Mr. Sonne’s home to make improvised explosive devices and he testified as to the number of explosive devices that could be made with the chemicals found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop and the garage. Some of that evidence is problematic as it presumed, for example, with respect to the TATP, that both cans of acetone that were in the garage were full and had useable acetone. As I will come to, that has not been proven. Furthermore, there was some overlap in chemicals that were needed for some of the named explosive substances. In any event, it is not necessary to review this evidence save to say that there is no doubt that if Mr. Sonne intended to combine any of the chemicals that he had into an explosive substance, that he could have made several one kilogram devices and the resulting explosions could have done a lot of serious damage in one or more attacks; for example, by blowing out the back half of a bus if the device was in the back or even just blowing a hole in the G20 security fence. In a crowded area, a blast from such a device could no doubt cause serious injury or worse.

[75] A lot of the chemicals available to Mr. Sonne could have been used as they were to make explosive substances. Others might need some preparation. For example, the ammonium nitrate prills could be ground to improve the resulting explosive. To the extent preparation was needed there is no evidence that this was started or attempted. Furthermore, the required ingredients for any particular explosive substance were not together on the lab desk or workbench suggesting Mr. Sonne was ready to start a synthesis experiment.

[76] When asked how long it would take to make explosive substances from the ingredients found, Dr. Anderson testified that it would depend on what and how much you were making but that it would take anywhere from a couple of hours to a couple of days. To create an oxidizer based explosive, i.e. potassium chlorate, ammonium nitrate, urea nitrate and HDN, you just need to add fuel and blend the chemicals to create an explosive substance, although it is important to note that Mr. Sonne did not have nitric acid that would have been needed for urea nitrate and HDN and would have had to make nitric acid with other chemicals. The process for making TATP and HMTD was more involved although I expect Mr. Sonne had the necessary expertise, based on the steps Dr. Anderson described were necessary.

[77] As Mr. Di Luca submitted, there was not much discussion with Dr. Anderson about how, once you had made an explosive substance, you would package it, make a detonator or in some cases a blasting cap or an initiating charge to set off the explosive and how you might get it ready and test it and bring it to your planned target, for example the G20. For example in the Edmonstone report, it is stated that ANFO, which is the combination of ammonium nitrate and fuel, typically diesel fuel, is relatively difficult to detonate requiring another explosive to initiate it. The need for an explosive as a detonator is, therefore, important in some cases.

[78] Dr. Anderson admitted that some elements to make explosive devices were missing from what was seized from Mr. Sonne’s home. For example, there were no small metal tubes that could be used as a detonator but these would be readily available at your nearest Canadian Tire. Other things could be used however, to hold a detonator, even a plastic bottle. There were no metal pipes found in Mr. Sonne’s home and according to Dr. Anderson “your average terrorist” would use plumbing supply type steel to make a pipe bomb because it can be filled with steel fragments, nuts, bolts and ball bearings and would generate a lot of fragments.

[79] Two short pieces of white plastic pipe with blue caps on either end, with a friction fit, were found somewhere in the back of the garage. Dr. Anderson said that they could be turned into pipe bombs, with material inside them that would detonate but they would only make a bang and generate a blast; you would lose the metal shrapnel effect. There were also other pieces of plastic pipe of different widths found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop that Dr. Anderson said could be used as containers for explosives but obviously they too would not create metal shrapnel.

[80] As already stated, Dr. Anderson testified, there are some significant correlations with what is referenced in Ragnar’s Guide to Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives and the chemicals and other materials found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop and garage. This includes ammonium nitrate, potassium chlorate, hexamine tablets, nichrome wire, aluminum powder and how to make nitric acid from potassium nitrate and sulphuric acid. However, as Dr. Anderson conceded, a lot of chemicals that can be used to make explosives are chemicals commonly found with household uses. In fact, the fuel that he testified that could be used to mix with ammonium nitrate or potassium chlorate to produce explosives, included vegetable oil, sugar and various flours that one would find in anyone’s kitchen. For that reason, in this case it becomes important to consider not only how the chemicals were packaged, when they were seized, but also where they were seized from. Chemicals like the various chemical substances found in the cupboard under the top of the lab desk, hand labelled presumably by Mr. Sonne, may raise more questions than, for example, a container marked “drain opener” in its original packaging, found at the back of the garage. In addition, I must consider the fact that Mr. Sonne appears to have had certain hobbies and interests as some of those could explain the presence of certain chemicals and equipment.

Count 1 - TATP

[81] TATP is a primary explosive substance that is stable but very sensitive to friction, impact and heat. Dr. Anderson testified that TATP is so sensitive that if you had some in your hand or in a glass jar and you dropped it, it would explode. It can both be used for the main charge or as a detonator. Dr. Anderson said that because TATP and HMTD are very easy to detonate; a wire with a current across it, for example from a broken light bulb, so that it glowed red would be sufficient heat to ignite and detonate either one of them. For this reason both TATP and HMTD get a lot of use as improvised detonators to ignite another explosive substance; the main charge.

[82] Based on the unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson, the required ingredients to make TATP are acetone, hydrogen peroxide and an acid which can be either sulphuric acid or hydrochloric acid. With the exception of the acetone, there is no dispute that these ingredients were present in either Mr. Sonne’s workshop or the garage. Acetone is an essential ingredient to make TATP. Two cans, both original commercial containers with commercial labels as “Acetone,” were found on the shelves at the back of the garage. One had the words “used acetone” written on a piece of paper over the print on the can. Acetone is a common solvent sold for use as paint thinner and for the purpose of cleaning and is readily available in hardware stores. Apart from all of the innocent explanations as to why Mr. Sonne may have had acetone in his garage, the two cans labelled acetone were not seized and the contents were not examined by Mr. Edmonstone. D.C. Albrecht admitted that he is not aware how much, if anything, was inside these containers.

[83] A four litre black plastic bottle; an original commercial container labelled: “Optimum Hydrogen Peroxide 29%,” was found on the same shelf as the other jars of chemicals in the cupboard under Mr. Sonne’s lab desk. It was nearly full and tested at 26% concentration which, according to Dr. Anderson, was more than sufficient to make TATP or HMTD. It is not a restricted product unless the concentration is over 30%, which was not the case here. According to the Edmonstone report, a concentration of 3-6% is typical of consumer products of hydrogen peroxide and up to 15% for hair bleach. A concentration of 26% is sufficient to cause chemical burns to skin. Although Dr. Anderson testified that hydrogen peroxide can also be used for cleaning, the labelling on the bottle in question shows green foliage and includes instructions as to how to use the product as a liquid fertilizer. Although Mr. Sonne obtained a quote from AlphaChem for 35% hydrogen peroxide on January 20, 2010, there is no evidence that he ever ordered or received this product. The way the bottle of hydrogen peroxide that was seized was labelled, and the percentage that it tested at, suggests that this bottle did not come from AlphaChem.

[84] Found on the shelves at the back of the garage was a 900 millilitre bottle in its original commercial container, still in plastic wrap, labelled “ro-tyme Liquid Drain Opener” for use in unclogging drains. It was nearly full of liquid that was identified as sulphuric acid which, according to Dr. Anderson, is the case for various brands of drain openers. Also found at the back of the garage was a 900 millilitre bottle in its original commercial container labelled “ro-tyme Muriatic Acid”, which was identified as hydrochloric acid and labelled for use for, among other things, etching and descaling. This acid is an industrial cleaning agent which can be used as a degreaser, solvent or disinfectant. Dr. Anderson testified that one of the main uses is removing oil or fuel stains from a driveway or paving stones.

[85] Although both of these acids can be used as the acid component in producing TATP or HMTD, given where these chemicals were found and the way they were packaged, and considered on their own, it is just as likely that they had been purchased for their intended household uses.

[86] A 3.78 litre bottle in its original container labelled Methyl Hydrate was found on the floor of the garage near the shelves at the back. On the label of the bottle it states that this chemical is best for preventing gas line freezing and that it can be used for cleaning glass surfaces and thinning shellac and cleaning brushes. It is a solvent and Dr. Anderson explained how this chemical can be used to purify TATP through a process of re-crystallization. If TATP is not purified it is in fact a little more explosive. Dr. Anderson agreed, however, that not all solvents are suitable for all uses and that depending on the substance that one might want to remove, one solvent might be better than another.

[87] In cross-examination Mr. Copeland reviewed the process to produce TATP with Dr. Anderson at length which included production, filtration, purification, and air drying. It is not necessary to review this evidence save for Dr. Anderson’s observation that the process has to be controlled to avoid the risk of it getting out of hand and that one would make TATP in small batches; a small batch would be five grams and you would need to be courageous to make 200 grams at a time. The time to make a single batch of 200 grams would be four to seven hours although a few batches could be made at the same time, provided you dedicated yourself to this as one must actively monitor temperature.

Count 2 - HMTD

[88] Like TATP, HMTD is a very sensitive explosive substance. Based on the unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson, the ingredients to make HMTD are hexamine, hydrogen peroxide and an acid. The standard acid used is citric acid which was not found in Mr. Sonne’s home. It is readily available in drugstores and, according to Dr. Anderson, hydrochloric acid or sulphuric acid will do. I have already reviewed the evidence with respect to those two acids and the hydrogen peroxide. Dr. Anderson testified that you would want to make HMTD in small batches of 20 to 50 grams and that it would take four to seven hours to do that.

[89] Two plastic jars with screw top lids, hand labelled “hexamine fuel tablets,” were seized from Mr. Sonne’s workshop. One jar contained 553 grams and the other 937 grams, for a combined weight of 1490 grams. I have no evidence as to the size of the jars, but they are larger than the gas fuel canisters for the camp stove found in the basement. The tablets are small discs. I have no evidence as to the number of tablets seized but it seems likely that they were at least the eight packages of “Coughlins” fuel tablets Mr. Sonne purchased from Canadian Tire on January 29^th^ and March 22^nd^, 2010. Based on the photo of the product, they appear to come in a cardboard box, which is consistent with Dr. Anderson’s evidence. The package states that there are 24 tablets in each box and that the tablets are for use with solid fuel stoves. They are described as “a safe, clean-burning fuel that is easy to ignite”. It is admitted that these tablets are hexamine.

[90] It is significant that the two jars of hexamine tablets were not found with the other chemicals under Mr. Sonne’s lab desk. It is not entirely clear where they were originally as they were moved by police by the time the photographs of them were taken. D.C. Albrecht admitted that he did not know exactly where the hexamine fuel tablets were found but he believed that they were on the floor between the shelving unit and the fridge in the basement workshop. However, in cross-examination, D.C. Albrecht was shown a photograph taken on the first day of the search and the jars of hexamine fuel tablets are not visible in the area between the shelving unit and the fridge. Everything in that area at this point was on the shelf that had camping equipment.

[91] Other photographs, presumably taken later, show a number of items on the floor including a pair of running shoes and various items for camping, including a plastic egg container, a metal bowl, and some camping equipment of some description in various nylon bags, one of which included a small camp stove, and gas canisters labelled “Primus Power Gas”. Still on the shelves were two tall bottles labelled fuel of some description. D.C. Albrecht testified that they would typically have white gas or some other fuel in them for camping. The camp stove was one that D.C. Albrecht testified would be attached through a hose and valve to a gas filled container. He testified that these items were tucked into the shelving unit and were brought out onto the floor as part of the search. There is also a fishing rod in this area and there was also camping equipment in the storage room near the workshop. It seems most likely, based on this evidence, that before the search, the jars of hexamine fuel tablets were on the shelf with the camping equipment.

[92] When asked about the hexamine tablets by Detective Bui, Mr. Sonne responded that camp stove fuel tablets can be bought at Canadian Tire and are entirely legal. The tablets clearly do not appear to be the fuel of choice for the camp stove found near them. However, they could be used with this stove. D.C. Albrecht admitted in cross-examination that the hexamine tablets would fit in the small space in the middle of the burner of the camp stove but he was not sure if that was the design or not. Dr. Anderson agreed that you could put one hexamine tablet on the concave section of the camp stove that was found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop, but that it wouldn’t be as efficient a heat source as the gas. He agreed, however, that these tablets are a more flexible fuel in that you can use one or two of them to start a campfire that has wood in it or charcoal briquettes or lump charcoal. If hexamine tablets come into contact with water, they dissolve and would not be very useful as fuel.

Count 3 - Urea Nitrate

[93] Based on the unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson, urea nitrate is a secondary explosive as it is not as sensitive as TATP or HMTD. It will not detonate using a heated filament or a lit match. The ingredients for urea nitrate are urea and nitric acid.

[94] Urea was found in a plastic screw top jar that was hand labelled “Urea (NH₂)₂CO” in the cupboard under the counter of the lab desk. A total of 842 grams was found in this container. No nitric acid was found in Mr. Sonne’s home.

[95] Dr. Anderson testified that the ingredients for nitric acid are potassium nitrate and hydrochloric acid. Although making nitric acid from these ingredients is not a complicated chemistry procedure, Mr. Sonne did not have the distillation apparatus that would ordinarily be used. However, Dr. Anderson explained how it would be possible to produce nitric acid in solution by using these ingredients, without this equipment.

[96] I have already set out the evidence with respect to the hydrochloric acid that was found in the garage. A plastic screw top jar containing 974 grams of potassium nitrate and hand labelled “KNO₃” was found, in the cupboard under the counter of the lab desk. Potassium nitrate is a strong oxidizing agent. Dr. Anderson testified that potassium nitrate can be used as a fertilizer, as a food preservative, for pyrotechnics and in the United States as a stump remover (a low explosion is used to “pop” the stump).

[97] When asked, Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that the urea was for use as a fertilizer in his garden.

Count 3 - HDN

[98] HDN is also a secondary explosive. The unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson is that the ingredients for HDN are hexamine and nitric acid. I have already set out the evidence with respect to the hexamine found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop and the evidence of Dr. Anderson as to how Mr. Sonne might have been able to make nitric acid from potassium nitrate and hydrochloric acid.

Count 4 – Potassium Chlorate

[99] Potassium chlorate is a strong oxidizing agent that can be mixed with various fuels to form explosive or pyrotechnic mixtures. Potassium chlorate explosives are considered to be secondary explosives although there is some evidence that they are heat sensitive and will burn and, if confined, may transit to detonation.

[100] The unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson is that potassium chlorate based explosives are an explosive substance that involve a combination of potassium chlorate with an organic fuel that could be motor oil or items in one’s kitchen like vegetable oil, sugar or even flour, including almond flour, or a combustible metal such as aluminum powder.

[101] At the time of the execution of the search warrant, a little over a kilogram of potassium chlorate was found in a large plastic container with calcium chloride hydrate, a drying agent, and two gauges measuring temperature and humidity, on a table in the furnace room. According to Dr. Anderson, you would not want to mix organic materials or metal powders with the potassium chlorate if it is wet as then it is very reactive and you could end up with a fire.

[102] On April 4, 2012, following the conclusion of the trial, including argument, the police located a five gallon Home Depot pail buried in the rear yard of 58 Elderwood Drive containing three plastic jars each labelled with various dates and the chemical nomenclature for potassium chlorate. The contents of these jars were tested to be potassium chlorate and the total weight of the three jars, less one to two grams taken from each jar for testing, was determined to be 1.745 kilograms. This evidence was admitted on consent as evidence in reply on April 13, 2012, after I had begun my deliberations. This brought the total of potassium chlorate Mr. Sonne had made to almost three kilograms.

[103] Mr. Sonne had the ingredients to make a potassium chlorate based explosive substance. Although Mr. Sonne admitted that there was almond flour in the basement fridge, he said it was for his wife’s baking and there is no reason to disbelieve him given there was also Gatorade, pop and beer in the fridge. However, other possible fuels that could be combined with potassium chlorate to create an explosive substance were found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop and the garage. This includes 479 grams of aluminum powder in what appeared to be its original container labelled “Alumilite Aluminum Powder” in the cupboard under the counter of the lab desk. The label states that it is ground aluminum used to thicken or extend the volume of aluminite casting plastic and that it is used to make the finished parts heavier and gives them an aluminum look. It warns that a face mask should be worn when using the product. During a Hacklab chat on May 29, 2010, during a discussion about the Danvers explosion, someone mentioned dust explosions and, in particular, aluminum dust and Mr. Sonne responded that he had some for mixing with epoxy and that it was not to be treated lightly. This could provide an innocent explanation for why Mr. Sonne had aluminum powder. Clearly it was being marketed for legitimate uses.

[104] The issue then is what did Mr. Sonne intend to do with the potassium chlorate and the aluminum powder and, in particular, is there a reasonable inference to be drawn from the evidence that he intended to use the potassium chlorate to produce an explosive substance or was his intention to make rocket fuel for high powered rockets.

[105] Potassium chloride, which can be legally purchased as salt, can be converted to potassium chlorate using an electrochemical cell; also referred to in the evidence as an electrolysis cell. Simply put, an electrochemical cell involves an electrical current that is passed through a liquid between an anode and a cathode to cause chemical reactions to occur; which can include conversion of potassium chloride into potassium chlorate. Although Dr. Anderson was relying on photographs, based on his evidence and considering all of the evidence, including Mr. Sonne’s posts and photographs as set out in the Chronology, I find that an electrochemical cell made from a large clear plastic container was found on a table in Mr. Sonne’s furnace room[^13] and that it had been used to make potassium chloride.

[106] This process to make potassium chlorate is a repetitive one in that you do a run, stop the electrical current, filter off some of the powder that has been generated, put the liquid back, add more salt and then start the run again. This process is repeated until as much chlorate as possible is removed from the liquid. According to Dr. Anderson, the lab equipment on the lab desk had a clear use in relation to the production of potassium chlorate. At the time of the search, the filtration apparatus that would be used to filter the precipitate from the electrochemical cell solution was not assembled but it would not take too much time to put together. It is the middle step between taking the material from the cell and putting the material into the drying box.

[107] Dr. Anderson testified that there is a fair amount of trial and error in determining an electrochemical process to create a certain substance. There is however, a lot of information on the Internet from people who have already done it and recommended what processes are best and Mr. Sonne had bookmarked and downloaded files on this process. As set out in the Chronology, based on photographs Mr. Sonne uploaded to Flickr and his posts during Hacklab chats, it seems likely that he experimented with two electrochemical cells before the one found in the furnace room at the time of the search. Only part of what Dr. Anderson described as a classic setup for a homemade electrochemical cell, namely a yellow lid for a pail with what could be a graphite rod through the middle and steel bolts for electrical leads and tubes for venting chlorine and sampling pH attached, was found and it appears to have been a larger unit than the different type of cell found at the time of the search. Only the lid of this larger electrochemical cell was found at the time of the search.

[108] What appears to be the smallest cell is shown in photographs that Mr. Sonne uploaded to his Flickr account on April 30, 2010. This was likely the first electrochemical cell given that it is shown as complete and in place on April 30, 2010, whereas the graphite rod for the larger electrochemical cell using a Home Depot pail, was not ordered until April 27, 2010 and even on an expedited basis, would not have arrived until the end of April. That electrochemical cell was shown in photographs on Flickr with links to the Hacklab chat on May 18, 2010. On the same day a photograph showing the electrochemical cell that was in place in Mr. Sonne’s furnace room, at the time of the search, was also created on Mr. Sonne’s computer. As it was still in place at the time of the search, presumably it was the third electrochemical cell that Mr. Sonne experimented with.

[109] In Mr. Edmonstone’s report, the liquid from what I have determined to be an electrochemical cell found in the furnace room was evaporated and of the solid material that remained, potassium chloride was the major component and potassium chlorate the minor component. Dr. Anderson testified that this would indicate to him that either the experiment was over and the chlorate had been filtered off and the liquid returned to the cell or they were getting ready to do another run.

[110] According to the Material Safety Data Sheet for potassium chlorate prepared by Sciencelab.com, Inc., a US company, potassium chlorate is clearly a very toxic chemical in that it is very hazardous in the case of skin or eye contact. Because it is a corrosive material, it should be stored in a separate safety storage cabinet or room. The product is noted as being stable and is considered non-flammable, with ratings as a fire hazard as zero, although it is extremely reactive with combustible materials and organic materials. In terms of various risks of explosion the data sheet simply states that information is not available.

[111] Potassium chlorate in quantities over one kilogram is a regulated substance but that is from the perspective of the vendor. Dr. Anderson testified that as a result it was not that easy to buy anymore but gave no evidence as to whether it can be purchased in small quantities in Canada. There is no evidence of any regulations that prohibit the simple possession of potassium chlorate although there are regulations that govern what you can do with the material when you have it.

[112] Mr. Sonne was asked by Detective Bui about the crystals that the police found with some kind of a liquid bucket that was dispelling gas. I believe this was a reference to what I have determined to be an electrochemical cell that was found on the table in the furnace room. Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that this was a “saltwater electrolysis cell,” that split it down into a chemical component that he would use when he got the proper licencing to make his own rocket engines. He told Detective Bui that if this chemical compound was mixed with sugar then it would be called candy rockets, that it did not burn by itself and that he would need a proper model rocket igniter to cause it to burn. Mr. Sonne’s description of what was happening with this electrochemical cell was completely truthful. The only thing is that Mr. Sonne did not say he was making potassium chlorate.

[113] A little later, Mr. Sonne explained his use of the electrochemical cell in the following way when Detective Bui showed Mr. Sonne a picture of what he called a chemical or liquid battery. Mr. Sonne said that by putting electricity in it, it split the two components and then when it was done you could get electricity back out of it or harvest the material to make fuel for a rocket. It is not clear what photograph Detective Bui was referring to but it appears that it was what I have determined to be the electrochemical cell in the furnace room. When asked about the voltmeters nearby, Mr. Sonne said that one measured current flow into the cell and the other measured voltage dropped across the terminal so he could tell how efficiently it was running. Although Mr. Sonne made no reference to potassium chlorate, these answers are factually correct and responsive to the questions.

[114] Detective Bui asked Mr. Sonne about crystals in a bucket next to what they had discussed as a liquid battery; what I presume was the electrochemical cell. Mr. Sonne advised Detective Bui that the crystals in the bottom were calcium chloride, which is a drying agent that you can buy at Home Depot. He advised Detective Bui that its purpose was for drying “stuff” and that the gauges were to monitor humidity and temperature so that he knew the dryer was drying and when the drying was complete. When he was asked what the purpose was he said he was “drying stuff” and he did not mention that he was drying potassium chlorate in this container but he was not asked and the rest of what he told Detective Bui is accurate.

[115] When asked about his diagram of the hydraulic jack, Mr. Sonne said it was a drawing of the press that would be used to press model rockets safely in a cardboard casing, if he ever managed to get it approved. He said that he had to stop because he heard back from the Rocketry Society who basically said that without a certain kind of licencing that he couldn’t even begin to do that so the idea was dumped and he was stuck with an $80 jack. He denied that any press had been built or that anything had been pressed. Again this is factually correct. Dr. Anderson explained how a press would be needed to make a rocket engine and there is no question that Mr. Sonne was told by CAR that he would need a licence to make rocket engines.

[116] A one kilogram bottle commercially labelled Aquarius Granular Pool Shock is alleged to have been purchased by Mr. Sonne from Canadian Tire which the Crown relies on as another way to get to a chlorate relevant to count 4. Dr. Anderson testified that this product is typically a hypochlorite that could be used to make a chlorate material using a different procedure than an electrochemical cell. However, no receipt for this purchase was entered into evidence and I have no evidence as to whether this product was found at the time of the search. Certainly it was not tested by Mr. Edmonstone. Furthermore, according to Dr. Anderson, this product is intended to sterilize swimming pools and kill bugs. There is no evidence that there was no swimming pool or pond in Mr. Sonne’s backyard or at his cottage. I have therefore not relied upon this submission.

Count 4 - Ammonium Nitrate

[117] The unchallenged evidence of Dr. Anderson is that you can make ammonium nitrate fuel oil (“ANFO”), a secondary explosive, from ammonium nitrate and a fuel of the same nature as the fuels that can be used with potassium chlorate, although liquid fuel is better. In a plastic jar with a screw top lid, in the cupboard underneath the top of Mr. Sonne’s lab desk, 2,461 grams of ammonium nitrate prills were found. The jar was correctly labelled by hand “NH₄NO₃”. Accordingly, Mr. Sonne had in his possession the ingredients to make ANFO. However, Dr. Anderson confirmed that ammonium nitrate can also be used as a fertilizer.

[118] Ammonium nitrate is a regulated chemical in quantities above one kilogram. Again I presume this is from the perspective of the vendor. Dr. Anderson testified that he was not sure if ammonium nitrate was commercially available apart from cold packs. As part of a study Dr. Anderson was intending to do, he was going to see if you could still find small quantities of ammonium nitrate in various retail type outlets.

[119] Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that the ammonium nitrate was for use as a fertilizer in his garden. When Detective Bui asked about the fact that the fertilizer was not in a bag under his back porch, Mr. Sonne responded that he had taken it from cold packs because you cannot buy ammonium nitrate in large quantities because of restrictions but that you can still buy it at Shoppers Drug Mart in cold packs. This appears to be true based on the evidence of Dr. Anderson. Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that if he looked in his yard he would see how he had various plots of corn, beans and plants laid out and that each one of those was to be fertilized with a specific fertilizer so that he could see the difference it made for yet another paper or just his own edification. When Detective Bui pointed out to Mr. Sonne that ammonium nitrate was a key ingredient in the production of ANFO, Mr. Sonne responded that this was “completely bullshit because there is no fuel oil mixed into that at all. I would never do that.” He was then asked whether or not there was fuel in his home and he said that he did not think that gas would qualify as a fuel oil.

[120] Dr. Anderson testified that each cold pack would yield 60-75 grams. That would mean Mr. Sonne used 32-33 cold packs to obtain the quantity of ammonium nitrate that was seized. There are only records of two purchases totalling five cold packs from Shoppers Drug Mart, both made in March 2010. I, therefore, have no evidence as to how and when Mr. Sonne purchased the other 25 or so cold packs; including whether he bought them at once or a few at a time and how he paid for them.

[121] On June 8, 2010, there was a Hacklab chat that included Mr. Sonne discussing the news about a province wide search for a man with 60 bags of ammonium nitrate. In the course of that discussion someone suggested that it was “the Goat” and thirty seconds later Mr. Sonne responded stating that he swore it wasn’t him. He then went on to say he only has one kilo of it and that it was about 30 bags of insta-cool packs. Accordingly, what Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui about how he got the ammonium nitrate appears to be true, although he was substantially off in terms of the weight.

[122] As the discussion progress, Mr. Sonne referred to an “Oklahoma special” which according to Ms. Nadeau demonstrates that he knew that ammonium nitrate can explode. I heard no evidence about the Oklahoma City bombing involving Timothy McVeigh, but given its notoriety, I can take judicial notice of the fact that it involved ammonium nitrate and certainly based on Mr. Sonne’s comments, both to Detective Bui and on this chat, it would be reasonable to infer that he knew ammonium nitrate could be used for an explosive substance.

Miscellaneous chemicals and materials

[123] Dr. Anderson agreed that a number of the chemicals in the jars in the cupboard under the lab desk had no application in the creation of explosives and that looking at the collection as a whole there are at least some things there that are not part of potential explosives. He also agreed that the collection of items and equipment might be there not as a unified collection for one purpose but for numerous purposes. Apart from the specific chemicals already mentioned, there were other chemicals, all in hand labelled plastic jars under the lab desk as follows:

(a) “KMnO₄”potassium permanganate (445 grams); the chemical used by the Underwear Bomber. It has been known to chemically initiate the primary explosive in a detonator. In this form of detonation no metal wires are necessary. This chemical is also used to tan leather and as swimming pool purification and makes a deep purple color if mixed with liquid. It is not yet a regulated substance.

(b) “Iron III oxide, Fe₂O₃”; could be used as a thermite in conjunction with aluminum powder. A thermite is an incendiary substance that burns with a very hot flame. It burns rather than expels gas and would not be used as a propellant. It is not an explosive substance either, as it neither detonates nor goes through the process of deflagration. According to the Edmonstone report, iron oxide is also used as a paint pigment and I note that when it was purchased on June 18, 2010, the invoice specified the color red which is consistent with the contents.

(d) “Hexachloroethane, C₂Cl₆; not relevant to explosives. Used to generate smoke.

(e) “Charcoal”; the container appears to contain charcoal powder but the substance was not tested. If it is charcoal, it could be used as a fuel to mix with ammonium nitrate to make ANFO or potassium chlorate to make an explosive substance but it could also be used as a fuel in a propellant.

(f) “KCl” potassium chloride; this container was found empty. Potassium chloride is the starting chemical if using an electrochemical cell to produce potassium chlorate.

(g) “Sulfamic acid”; not relevant to explosives but used for de-scaling metal surfaces, removing rust and possibly cleaning an electrode.

(h) “K₂SiO₃” potassium silicate; not relevant to explosives but used as a drying agent.

(i) “CuSO₄” copper sulphate; not relevant to explosives. Can be used to grow blue crystals. Dr. Anderson’s evidence confirms that the three beakers set up with a blue substance in them on Mr. Sonne’s lab desk were being used to produce blue crystals from copper sulphate and that the photographs posted on Mr. Sonne’s Flickr account appear to be blue crystals that one could expect to be made from copper sulphate. This confirms Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui that he was growing crystals to give to his friends as gifts, using copper sulphate, which is a root remover you can purchase at Home Depot.

(j) “Dextrin”; is a powder used to thicken material and can be used to produce a type of glue. As it is a carbon source it could act as a fuel source when mixed with an oxidizer. If ammonium nitrate or potassium chlorate were being used to make propellants, they would be ground up into a fine powder and then dextrin could be used to hold that powder, together with a fuel.

(k) “NaHCO₃” sodium bicarbonate; this is ordinarily called baking soda and was found in a plastic jar with a screw top lid and labelled with its chemical nomenclature. It is used to control acidity or basicity. Dr. Anderson testified that it is part of the control using electrochemical cell production of potassium chlorate and he described a process whereby sodium bicarbonate can be used to remove some of the acid left in TATP from the initial production. It can also be mixed with water to have nearby for safety in the event of a splash while working with an acid. Although it is odd that Mr. Sonne would transfer sodium bicarbonate into a plastic jar and label it with its chemical nomenclature rather than simply keep a box of baking soda in his lab, or for that matter in his kitchen, this is consistent with someone who likes to be organized.

(l) “KOH”; this was labelled as potassium hydroxide but tested as potassium carbonate hydrate, which is a drying agent and not necessary for the explosives substances set out in the indictment. If a small residue of KOH were left in the container it could react with moisture and carbon dioxide to form potassium carbonate hydrate. It is, therefore, reasonable to conclude that this jar was correctly labelled by Mr. Sonne.

(m) “Stearine”; not relevant to explosives. Used to make soap and candles.

[124] In addition, there were the following substances found in the cupboard under the lab desk:

(a) Two plastic packages marked “brilliant crimson aniline dye.” The powder dissolves in water producing a bright red solution. Dr. Anderson agreed that these could be combined with the zinc oxide or the hexachloroethane to generate colored smoke.

(b) A small Ziploc bag labelled “wax shaving.” Dr. Anderson testified that they could be used as a fuel source, but a very inefficient one, when mixed with ammonium nitrate. Furthermore, they would need to be finely ground which is why flour, sugar or aluminum powder is a better fuel. Some recipes on the Internet require wax shavings to be blended with a chlorate such as potassium chlorate. They could also be used as a binding agent in a propellant.

(c) Another Ziploc bag labelled “PVC and ABS shavings”. Dr. Anderson said that PVC is not a good fuel as it does not like to burn but it could be used in the production of smoke. The ABS shavings could be used as a fuel source if mixed with ANFO and finely ground.

[125] The presence of chemicals in the cupboard under the lab desk that have no connection to explosive substances is important. They were generally stored in the same fashion as the chemicals relied upon by the Crown; in plastic jars hand labelled with their chemical name. This suggests the possibility that there were innocent purposes for the other chemicals that the Crown relies upon in support of these charges and that they were stored where they were for an innocent purpose consistent with some of the many and varied interests Mr. Sonne had.

Equipment and other items found in the workshop and garage

[126] On Mr. Sonne’s lab desk there was what Dr. Anderson identified as a vacuum filtration apparatus used for extracting a liquid from a solid through a funnel such as the Buchner funnel, also found on the desk. It was not assembled when it was found but would not take long to assemble. Dr. Anderson testified that it could be used to filter the TATP, HMTD or potassium chlorate crystals from the liquid but agreed it could be used anytime you need to extract a solid from a liquid. Also found on the lab desk was a manual, hand-operated vacuum pump which could be used to generate vacuum in the vacuum filtration apparatus, pulling air and liquid through the Buchner funnel which would expedite the process.

[127] In the cupboard under the top of the lab desk, the top shelf contained various beakers and flasks as well as filters. There was a hydrometer in this location as well which is used to measure the densities of liquid including checking the strength of, for example, hydrogen peroxide or sulphuric acid in an older car battery.

[128] Next to the lab desk there was a tall white cabinet with eight sections inside that appeared to be carefully organized, with sections including brushes of various descriptions, various tools, various glues, small saws and another with soldering equipment and coils of solder. D.C. Albrecht testified that a soldering iron could be used to make any electronic circuitry to control the timing on a detonator. It is also used in making electronics and other electrical products in order to join the wires or attach a component to a circuit board, for example. Mr. Sonne referred to buying a soldering iron on his Toronto Goat blog for his magnetron/wave guide experiment.

[129] Generally speaking, in the workshop in addition to the chemicals, there were all sorts of electronics, power tools, hand tools, and even musical instruments. A plastic Ziploc bag labelled nichrome wire was found on the workbench, located in amongst miscellaneous electrical components. Dr. Anderson testified that it is a very good wire to use as a filament for an improvised detonator as it is imbedded in the material that is the detonator and heats up quickly when a current is put across it. He testified it is easy to obtain and has other uses including heating elements. As set out in the Chronology the Hacklab chats repeatedly refer to nichrome wire as being necessary to keep the “Maker-Bot” 3D printer working. This could suggest that Mr. Sonne had nichrome wire for an innocent purpose.

[130] An antistatic bag was also found in a Ziploc bag in a drawer of the workbench. Although theses bags may be used to store TATP and HMTD, as these explosives are very sensitive to static electricity, to avoid an unintended shock when handling the material, these bags can also be used to store electronic components or anything else that would be sensitive to static electricity. There is only evidence of one bag that was found and it does not appear very large. In a Hacklab chat on May 18, 2010, Mr. Sonne said that he was working on designing/building automated blending and fuel pressing gear for the potassium chlorate and was thankful that he already had a good antistatic setup from his electronics days.

[131] A temperature thermocouple was also found on the workbench. It is an electrical device for measuring temperature. Dr. Anderson explained that temperature control monitoring is essential to producing TATP and HMTD and so this device could be used in that process, although it can be used generally to monitor the temperature of other chemical reactions.

[132] A plastic bin containing a two-element electric hotplate, a glass dish and some oven mitts was found on the floor of the workshop near the workbench. Dr. Anderson described how the hotplate could be used to dissolve TATP in methanol to purify it by re-crystallization. The hotplate however, has obvious other uses. Dr. Anderson agreed that this hotplate could be used to heat copper sulphate to dissolve it in water which must be done in order to make blue crystals.

[133] On the shelves at the back of the garage the police seized an acrylic welding kit, a face shield, dust mask, safety goggles and what could be a vapour mask. Dr. Anderson testified that this type of protective equipment is standard use for some types of chemistry and would be needed when handling a very strong acid such as sulphuric acid for the production of TATP. It also would provide protection from sparks, dust, very fine particulate matter, and wood sanding. Dr. Anderson also referred to the steel wool that was seized from the shelves at the back of the garage and explained that a filament of the steel wool could be used as a source of heat in an improvised detonator. This, however, is also a common household item used for cleaning pots and finishing repair work to wood and metal.

[134] In summary, although some of the equipment Mr. Sonne had could have been used to make explosive substances, all of it could also be explained by his various other interests or the fact he was making potassium chlorate.

Statement of Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui concerning his intent and his interest in rocketry

[135] When asked about the jars of chemicals found by the police in the cupboard under the lab desk, Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that they were all legal and labelled. Some of his response is unintelligible. He said that metal oxides were used for “degassing metal” because he wanted to get into amateur foundry work and pouring; the baking soda was for fireproofing material; the hydrochloric acid was for cleaning concrete on the flagstone patio in the backyard; the sulphuric acid was for when their drains jam up, and the urea and ammonium nitrate were both fertilizers he intended to use in his garden. He agreed with Detective Bui that ammonium nitrate can be used in the construction of an explosive device but said that so could lighter fluid or the barbecue tank in your backyard or the cooking oil in your house.

[136] Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he had no intention of ever hurting anybody or doing anything and that he had no interest in assembling any kind of bomb in his house and risking his wife’s life much less his neighbourhood. He denied any intent of ever combining any of these things. When asked if he had the elements that could be combined to create an explosive device, Mr. Sonne said no because he would not combine them into an explosive device. Detective Bui persisted, however, and said that was not exactly his question and that what he was asking was if they took a larger list of items out of his house, and combined them in a certain manner, could they create an explosive device. Mr. Sonne at this point, quite reasonably, said the interview might be over. He stated he was not going to have Detective Bui get him on tape admitting to something that “he didn’t think so.” Given his right to silence, and his denials of having any intent to combine any of these ingredients, I do not find Mr. Sonne’s position at this point to be unreasonable.

[137] Mr. Sonne eventually did admit that he supposed that combining the chemicals in the right way could create an explosive device but insisted that that would be illegal and unlawful and not something he would want to be doing. He said he was innocent because he had no unlawful intent to do anything and referred to the fact that a crime takes both mens rea and actus reus. Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he had no intention of doing anything that would ever hurt anybody. If anything he had tried to make sure that in the hobbies he was interested in, he had all of the licencing and followed the law. He said there was nothing that he could not go out and buy.

[138] As I have already reviewed, although Mr. Sonne did not specifically mention that he was making potassium chlorate, what he told Detective Bui about the electrochemical cell found in the furnace room and the potassium chlorate that was drying there, was accurate. When Detective Bui told Mr. Sonne that he found it coincidental that as the G20 was approaching he became a member of CAR and was creating rocket fuel, Mr. Sonne responded: “Because I want to prove that I have no ill intent. You know, I want to prove that I’m aboveboard, that I follow regulations. And, that’s why I’ve never assembled any of these things, any of these chemicals into a finished device. And that’s what makes some of these charges so ridiculous, is that I don’t actually possess anything that is a finished explosive…” Detective Bui said “you possess the precursors”. Mr. Sonne responded “Yes, but that is not at all illegal. Not in those quantities.”

[139] Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that once the police had gone through his computer they would see correspondence that he had been making it very clear about wanting to follow the rules, asking for advice and finding out that what he was doing he could not proceed with any further without contravening laws like the Ministry of Natural Resources. He went on to say even if he got licencing for “that”; I presume a reference to rocket fuel, he still would not be able to move it anywhere because he would need the OK from Transport Canada. He said that the police would see that he had actually downloaded the forms from the government to have it detailed exactly as to what he needed to have and that he would need land commercially zoned and space so he could continue with these “hobbies”. He said: “You’ll see all of this come out, that I’m interested in just being a good citizen and following the rules for these hobbies that seem to attract people’s attention when Obama comes to town.” When Detective Bui challenged him to say that all of this was just creating an alibi in case he got caught, Mr. Sonne said “I would say that’s absolutely not the case.”

Mr. Supinski’s evidence

[140] I heard considerable evidence from Mr. Supinski about his renewed interest in amateur rocketry which was intended to corroborate the other evidence which suggests Mr. Sonne has a similar interest and that they were going to build rockets together and perhaps even do a Hacklab presentation on the subject. This evidence is important as it could answer the Crown’s theory that rocketry was only an alibi for Mr. Sonne.

[141] Mr. Supinski described his interest in rocketry from the time he was a child and how it was renewed when he picked up a Linux magazine in April 2009 that described how to build a Linux powered large rocket from information including designs, programming and components provided for free in the article and through open sources on the Internet. Mr. Supinski described the work he had done in researching to build a smaller version of this Linux rocket and how he wanted to launch his own rockets and share this hobby with his son. He testified that he did not get to the design phases, although he did figure out the aeronautic systems; the way to track the performance of the rocket. Based on his research, Mr. Supinski found out about the certifications required for high powered rockets with CAR and NAPAS. He described the certification process which requires both written exams and demonstrations setting up and firing your own rocket for Levels 1 through 3 (which are similar except the increasing power of the rocket engine that is used) and for a Level 4 certification where you need to design a rocket from scratch and successfully launch it.

[142] Mr. Supinski testified that the first time he would have had a discussion at Hacklab about his interest in rocketry and had “it out in the open” was in April or May 2009. He said that he spent time at Hacklab on this interest and that other members became interested including Mr. Sonne. Mr. Supinski had done some mark-ups to the schematic of the Linux rocket but he was not sure when he did these mark-ups save that it was before Mr. Sonne’s arrest and that he would have worked on it at Hacklab. He presumed that Mr. Sonne saw this as did other Hacklab members. Although it may be that, as a result, Mr. Sonne was exposed to the idea of rocketry as early as the spring of 2009, Mr. Supinski eventually admitted that he and Mr. Sonne did not talk about getting involved in rockets together as a joint project until May 2010, around the time of the Hacklab chats that are set out in the Chronology. This is consistent with what is stated in those chats.

[143] Mr. Supinski testified that he didn’t know how to make rocket fuel and never asked Mr. Sonne to make a rocket engine nor was he told that Mr. Sonne was doing so. He was aware Mr. Sonne was doing research on ways to save costs on engine design and possibly the chemistry but thought the idea was shelved when he didn’t have the correct permits to pursue it. Mr. Supinski testified that he wasn’t working with Mr. Sonne on the design of rocket engines and that he did not understand what chemicals would be involved. He believed that a Hacklab chemist with the nickname “aonomus” was working with Mr. Sonne which was good enough for him.

[144] Mr. Supinski insisted that he never believed Mr. Sonne was making rocket fuel in his home, but that he was only researching the process and that he was not aware that Mr. Sonne had bought chemicals. He refused to concede that the Hacklab chats on May 18, 2010 make it clear that Mr. Sonne had started to produce potassium chlorate through electrolysis even though he warned Mr. Sonne to be careful on the chats. In this regard Mr. Supinski refused to admit the obvious. Despite Ms. Nadeau taking him through the various chats, he did not recall what the electrolysis cell was that Mr. Sonne referred to and he denied knowing what potassium chlorate is. On reflection, Mr. Supinski always appeared to be very precise in his answers and it may be that he was refusing to admit that Mr. Sonne was making rocket fuel. This would be accurate but at other times Mr. Supinski did not acknowledge even the obvious; that Mr. Sonne was making potassium chlorate. With respect to ammonium nitrate, Mr. Supinski testified that Mr. Sonne talked about measuring the yields of crops at some point before his arrest. I found his evidence about what he knew about Mr. Sonne’s actual intent with respect to rocketry to be completely unreliable.

[145] When asked about explosives, Mr. Supinski said he didn’t know if Mr. Sonne had an interest in them but that he did and he thought that they were “cool”. When he was taken through nine different conversations about explosives over the course of three days on the Hacklab chats, that included Mr. Sonne’s participation, Mr. Supinski conceded that Mr. Sonne was fascinated with explosives but denied he was obsessed with them.

Dr. Anderson’s evidence concerning rocketry

[146] Dr. Anderson testified that you would not use TATP, HMTD or ANFO as rocket fuel. He acknowledged however, that potassium chlorate when combined with a fuel is used to produce propellants for rocket motors (also called rocket engines) in the United States, but he said that it is banned for use in fireworks and other propellant materials in Canada. You need a manufacturing licence to produce propellants in Canada under the Explosives Act. According to Dr. Anderson, the manufacture of propellants and fireworks gives rise to the risk of explosion even if that is not their intended use. Depending on the quantities mixed, this is a significant risk associated with any work with chlorates which is why a licence is needed to manufacture these materials.

[147] Ms. Nadeau asked Dr. Anderson whether a rocket engine could be used as a detonator. He answered that it could be used as a heat source to ignite material very sensitive to heat such as TATP or HMTD, but that he did not think that a rocket motor itself would be used as blasting cap in terms of providing the necessary shock, which I presume was a reference to setting off the main charge. If I understand this evidence correctly he was suggesting that a rocket engine could be used to ignite a detonator, but not actually be the detonation device to set off a main charge.

[148] Although the only place Dr. Anderson saw rocket motors was when he did some research on the Internet in terms of whether or not you can buy rocket motors and what size they would be, he gave general evidence on making a rocket motor. Dr. Anderson explained that a rocket motor is a shaped press or cast solid composition that is ignited at one end and burns very rapidly generating a lot of gas directed out the bottom of the rocket providing the thrust to shoot the rocket up in the air. To make a rocket motor from the materials found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop you could grind up the potassium chlorate and blend it with a fuel such as sugar or a little bit of aluminum powder and you could either roll it up in some sort of paste with wax or you could mix it with wax or dextrin or some sort of binder and press it so you could compact the material so it stays in shape. The inside interior core of the propellant would be designed to allow for the controlled burn rate that was necessary. The rocket motor could be pressed by hand or you could use a drill press (which was in the garage) to bring some sort of plunger down into the rocket and if you were ingenious enough you could modify the car jack that was found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop to provide the force to pack down the propellant for a rocket motor. Dr. Anderson agreed that the sketch that Mr. Sonne posted on Flickr on June 7, 2010 appears to be a diagram for an improvised press.

[149] As I understood this evidence, the same principal ingredients are used to make a substance intended to explode or a substance intended for use in a rocket engine. The difference is that to make a rocket engine you must add the steps Dr. Anderson identified that are necessary to ensure a controlled burn and thrust instead of an explosion, which principally involves adding another substance to hold the mixture together so it can be pressed into the required shape to control the burn. Given the clear crossover in the chemicals used for either purpose, and given Dr. Anderson’s expertise, I found this evidence to be reliable. When he was pressed beyond this fairly general level, he made it clear he was not sure of the answer and on one occasion at the request of Mr. Copeland, he consulted a colleague over the break on the subject of ammonium nitrate based propellants. No objection was made but that in my view could not result in admissible evidence. In any event, even if I were to accept as a fact that there are ammonium nitrate based propellants, there is absolutely no evidence in this case that Mr. Sonne had any intention of using the ammonium nitrate for this purpose.

[150] Dr. Anderson was not in a position to identify the largest size of rocket engine that might be used by a hobbyist other than what he had seen for sale, which he described as small hobby rocket motors. Dr. Anderson was asked, if one was making rocket fuel, would “this” be a lot or a little in terms of rocket fuel, after Ms. Nadeau had asked him about the aluminized ammonium nitrate mixture. It is not clear what the “this” referred to but I presume Dr. Anderson’s response was with respect to the potassium chlorate. He answered that it would depend on the size of the rocket and he repeated that he did not have a lot of experience, but from what he had seen, most hobby rockets were not that big in diameter. He had not seen that many model rockets of the sort of amateur rocketry hobbyist that are in the order of six to ten inches in diameter. For what he believed to be an average size of four inches, he thought you would only need a maximum of 100 to 200 grams.

[151] In cross-examination Dr. Anderson was asked whether or not a little over a kilo of potassium chlorate is a small or large amount of potassium chlorate for the use in rocket motors. He said that it would depend upon the length and diameter of the engine, the number of motors that one was intending to create and how much other “stuff” you were adding to it. In re-examination Dr. Anderson testified that a thousand grams plus of potassium chlorate would indicate either a significant sized rocket body or quite a few rocket motors to supply quite a few small rockets. Neither counsel specifically asked Dr. Anderson to consider quantities for high powered rockets.

Evidence relevant to the Counselling charge – Count 5

[152] It is the position of the Crown that because of comments made by Mr. Sonne on his Twitter account in connection to photographs he was posting on his Flickr account of what he perceived to be a design flaw in the G20 fence, that he committed the offence of counselling mischief not committed. The specific evidence relied upon by the Crown in support of this charge can be summarized as follows.

[153] As set out in the Chronology, Mr. Sonne posted many photographs of the G20 fence, including close-ups of how the fence had been constructed including the hole size in the fencing material. Mr. Sonne also had a YouTube[^14] account under the title “torontogoat” which hosted eight videos of the G20 fence line.

[154] The crux of the Crown’s case are the tweets Mr. Sonne posted to his Twitter account on June 18 and 19, 2010 with the #g20 report hashtag[^15], some with links to photographs on Flickr, that are set out verbatim in the Chronology. The photographs posted to Flickr include a close-up of the G20 fencing material and Mr. Sonne states in the tweets that there is a design flaw in the fence. He refers to the fact that the holes in the fence are small and that tree steps for climbing trees or big bolts could be used to allow someone to get a good grip on the fence to go up or pull down the fence. A magnetic whiteboard in what appeared to be Mr. Sonne’s office had a printout of a G20 news article entitled “Downtown to become a fortress for G20 Summit”. There was also a map of the downtown core of Toronto with blue and green lines representing fences and security areas constructed for the Summit.

[155] When Detective Bui referred to the photographs of the G20 fence Mr. Sonne had posted on Flickr, he readily admitted that he had taken them. With respect to the photograph of the tree spikes, Mr. Sonne said that they are used for climbing trees when you go hunting or want to take pictures off the ground. When asked whether or not by putting these photographs on Flickr he was suggesting that they should be used to climb the fence, Mr. Sonne said that was not his intent, rather his intent was to merely say that the possibility existed as someone could use them to do that. He claimed that he was not trying to educate people on how to do some of these things.

[156] The Crown also relies on Mr. Sonne’s interest in the G20. As set out in the Chronology, Mr. Sonne posted many photographs of surveillance cameras that had been installed around the city for the G20 on his Flickr account in the days leading up to the G20; 71 photographs were posted on June 16, 2010. Only one photograph which referred to a “cable in joint” was relied upon by the Crown as suggesting intent to do damage to the cameras. However, having regard to the caption, this photograph was equally consistent with Mr. Sonne pointing out an obvious security flaw in that the location of the cable in the concrete was clearly labelled.

[157] In his statement to Detective Bui, Mr. Sonne denied that his running commentary was to encourage people to cause damage to those cameras, but rather that it was about how many cameras there were and where they were so that they would be taken down and the G20 would not be used as a reason to bring cameras into the city and leave them there. When Detective Bui commented that he had a lot of photographs of the cameras, Mr. Sonne responded “yes, cuz you guys put up a lot of cameras, and we just need to get them back down when they’re done like you promised.”

[158] This statement is consistent with some of the tweets by Mr. Sonne when he linked his Twitter account to his Flickr account where these pictures were posted and comments that he made with the photographs. For example, a couple of the photographs posted on June 16, 2010 are of a sign that gives notice of a CCTV camera with the caption “Gestapo.” On the same date, Mr. Sonne tweeted: “now we have a record of most of the surveillance cameras just in case the Gestapo forget to take them down.”

[159] In Mr. Sonne’s first statement to Detective Bui, when asked about his Flickr page, he told Detective Bui that he did not know who came to visit it and that it was not established for G20 communication but rather a place for him to upload his photographs. That appears to be true as Mr. Sonne’s Flickr account was in place before the G20. However, he did link photographs on his Flickr account to his Twitter account and into Hacklab chats. The photographs the Crown relies upon were shared with the public in this way.

[160] All tweets posted to Twitter are public and visible to anyone with a connection to the Internet. Mr. Sonne stated an intention to begin actively tweeting because of the G20 with his tweet on May 8, 2010 but he did not get that active until mid-June 2010 and then he was regularly marking his tweets with the hashtag for the G20 namely “#g20 report”. Users of Twitter may “follow” other Twitter users by subscribing to their account. Once followed, any tweets posted by the account being followed will be displayed automatically in the main screen of the user who is following. On Mr. Sonne’s Twitter account, he was following the G20 Mobilize Group which was providing updates and news from the Community Solidarity Network around the G20 meetings as well as MDCLegalUpdates providing activists legal updates from the Movement Defence Committee in Toronto.

[161] There is a serious issue as to whether or not the record of the tweets concerning the G20 security fence and the tweets that were made by Mr. Sonne is complete and whether or not the entire conversation thread is before the court. The Twitterpod file of tweets that was entered into evidence does not necessarily contain the complete record of any hashtagged conversation threads such as the #g20report that the torontogoat account/Mr. Sonne participated in. The only tweets available are those made either by Mr. Sonne on his torontogoat account or tweets from accounts that, at the time of the particular tweet, were being followed by Mr. Sonne on his torontogoat account. There are two types of replies to tweets by torontogoat that might be missing from the Twitterpod data in the court record. First of all, tweets to the #g20report hashtag thread from someone Mr. Sonne was not following would not appear in the Twitterpod data. Secondly, there is no evidence as to whether or not tweets that used the “@” symbol, in other words “@torontogoat,” which would be public posts to Twitter by someone Mr. Sonne was not following, which would be brought to Mr. Sonne’s account’s attention and could be considered a reply directly to torontogoat, are contained in the evidence. If a response was made by someone that Mr. Sonne was following, he would see it and that would appear in the Twitterpod data.

ANALYSIS

[162] I now turn to my analysis of the evidence and consideration of the charges.

Application of W.D.

[163] The first issue is whether or not the principles set out in the decision of the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. W.(D.)[^16]apply, given that Mr. Sonne did not testify. In this case, I have the evidence of Mr. Supinski who was called on behalf of the Defence, the statements given by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui which were tendered by the Crown and contain both inculpatory and exculpatory statements and statements made by Mr. Sonne on his blog, in chats, on Twitter and Flickr, in emails and in correspondence relied upon by both the Crown and the Defence. In his closing submissions, Mr. Di Luca relied heavily on the statements Mr. Sonne gave to Detective Bui and he submitted that the principles of W.D. apply in these circumstances. Ms. Nadeau submitted that it was not a “true W.D. situation” and pointed out that Mr. Sonne wasn’t asked about a lot of the purchases of the chemicals because Detective Bui didn’t know about them at that point and that his statement, therefore, is incomplete. Neither provided any authority on the issue.

[164] With the assistance of my law clerk, I have determined that the case that is determinative of this issue is a recent decision of the Court of Appeal; R. v. B.D.[^17] Although there was some uncertainty in the jurisprudence about whether the W.(D.) requirement extends to such circumstances, the Court concluded at para. 114 as follows:

What I take from a review of all of these authorities is that the principles underlying W.(D.) are not confined merely to cases where an accused testifies and his or her evidence conflicts with that of Crown witnesses. They have a broader sweep. Where, on a vital issue, there are credibility findings to be made between conflicting evidence called by the defence or arising out of evidence favourable to the defence in the Crown's case, the trial judge must relate the concept of reasonable doubt to those credibility findings. The trial judge must do so in a way that makes it clear to the jurors that it is not necessary for them to believe the defence evidence on that vital issue; rather, it is sufficient if - viewed in the context of all of the evidence - the conflicting evidence leaves them in a state of reasonable doubt as to the accused's guilt… In that event, they must acquit.

[165] For these reasons I conclude that the principles in W.(D.) apply to the statements given by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui, the statements made by Mr. Sonne on his blog, in chats, on Twitter and Flickr, in emails and in correspondence and to the evidence of Mr. Supinski. If any of the evidence favourable to Mr. Sonne leaves me with a reasonable doubt then he must be acquitted. If that evidence does not leave me with a reasonable doubt, I must still assess whether the Crown has proven Mr. Sonne’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, in assessing this evidence, I am entitled to consider it in the context of all of the other evidence.

[166] The statements given to Detective Bui by Mr. Sonne on June 23, 2010 and June 26, 2010 were not given under oath and, of course, there was no opportunity for cross-examination although Detective Bui certainly challenged some of Mr. Sonne’s assertions. Neither counsel provided any law with respect to how the exculpatory and inculpatory elements of athese statements should be assessed.

[167] Paciocco and Stuesser in The Law of Evidence[^18] clearly articulate the admissibility of the out of court exculpatory statements at p. 499:

If the Crown produces a statement made by the accused, however, it cannot edit the exculpatory part out and tender only the inculpatory material. The entire context of what was said must be admitted, and the entire statement will be available to the trier of fact as proof of the truth of its contents. [emphasis added]

[168] The Supreme Court of Canada affirmed this proposition in R. v. Rojas[^19] and added commentary on how such statements should be weighed. At issue in that case was whether it was appropriate for a trial judge to give the jury a “Duncan instruction”, [^20] which states as follows:

The incriminating parts of the statement are likely to be true (otherwise why say them?), whereas the excuses do not have the same weight. The exculpatory portion of the statement only need raise a reasonable doubt even if the jury does not believe it to be true, whereas an inculpatory statement can only assist the Crown's case if the jury is convinced of its proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

[169] The Supreme Court of Canada held that trial judges should not give this instruction, but agreed that it was a correct statement of law.[^21] I conclude in light of this authority that the exculpatory portions of Mr. Sonne’s out of court statements do not have the same weight as the inculpatory portions but that his exculpatory statements need only raise a reasonable doubt, in which case he is entitled to the benefit of any such doubt.[^22] This is consistent with the principle in W.(D.).

Credibility assessments

[170] With these principles in mind, I shall turn first to a general consideration of Mr. Sonne’s statements to Detective Bui that were admitted as part of the Crown’s case. To the extent Mr. Sonne gave incriminating information, for example with respect to his purchase of chemicals, there really is no longer any dispute about this. In many cases the Crown has proven these purchases through records from Mr. Sonne’s computer or his Visa. The primary issue is what weight I should give to the explanations Mr. Sonne gave for why he had certain chemicals in his possession. His statements are also relevant to the counselling charge.

[171] The statements to Detective Bui were videotaped. This has given me some opportunity to assess Mr. Sonne’s demeanour during the course of these interviews. For the most part, Mr. Sonne was responsive to Detective Bui’s questions although there were a few occasions when he refused to answer a question because he was clearly well informed of his right to remain silent.

[172] It is relevant to consider what Mr. Sonne knew about the charges as his statements were given a day or more after his arrest. By the time of the first interview on June 23, 2010, Mr. Sonne had had an opportunity to consult with counsel. At the outset of that interview, Mr. Sonne stated that after reading the charge list, “you guys make me look like I’m some kind of terrorist or something”. He then went on to question what the various charges were about but by this time Mr. Sonne clearly knew that his house was being searched and that chemicals had been found, as he had had a conversation about the chemicals with Detective Hill on the evening of June 22, 2010. There is no evidence as to what, specifically, the charge list said in connection with the discovery of chemicals, other than possession of explosive substances, but Mr. Sonne did react to this and told Detective Bui that he was not in possession of any of these things and that he thought the officers were “trumping this up, trying to nail me to the wall.” He went on to say that he guessed that he had “pissed off some police officers taking photographs” but that when a once in a lifetime thing came to Toronto it was only fair to expect people to take photographs and have records and that there was no unlawful intent with any of these things.

[173] Ms. Nadeau submitted that when Mr. Sonne was arrested and then when he gave his statement to Detective Bui, he didn’t look very surprised or concerned. When he was arrested, Mr. Sonne was mumbling out loud about why he had been arrested and, of course, at that time he had not been charged with any explosive charges. It is not clear if he knew then that his house was about to be searched but there is certainly no sign he was concerned about the arrest. As to whether he was surprised or not, he had been detained at least once before and so he might not have been surprised about that. It is true that during his first statement to Detective Bui, Mr. Sonne did not appear too concerned but that could also suggest that he knew he had not been making any explosive substances and that he had no intention of doing so. I, therefore, did not find this aspect of his demeanour to be of much assistance.

[174] Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui does not touch on all the issues. He wasn’t asked about what was on his computer because that was not yet in the possession of the police. He was not asked about all the chemicals and equipment because they had not been analyzed. However, Detective Bui did cover a lot of ground and Mr. Sonne answered most of his questions.

[175] Ms. Nadeau submitted that in his statement Mr. Sonne was trying to assist himself and that he was being pretty careful about what he should or shouldn’t say and that he was saying things he wanted Detective Bui to believe. I would expect this from an intelligent man. It is true that Mr. Sonne wasn’t forthright about everything. For example, Ms. Nadeau referred to the fact that when he was shown pictures of air piston discs, he did not volunteer what they were or that they were for his air rifles. He only told Detective Bui that it was a plastic washer after being used and that it was not related to the potato cannon. However, that is all he was asked and given his circumstances he cannot be faulted for responding only to the questions asked; he had the right to refuse to answer all of them. What he did tell Detective Bui was true. Furthermore, later on when Detective Bui was about to put the photograph of the air rifles to Mr. Sonne, he immediately volunteered that he had air rifles. There is no dispute that they were perfectly legal.

[176] Mr. Sonne was also not completely forthright about his magnetron experiment. He told Detective Bui that he was trying to find out how susceptible “homemade gear and stuff was to basically jamming”, that he didn’t want to interfere with other people because that was not a lawful use of airwaves and that it was only being designed to see if he could fry the wireless in his home. This is contrary to his stated intent in his first blog in late February 2009 when he stated that he wanted to see if he could make a device capable of burning out communication systems. He also told Detective Bui that the magnetron had no effect on the network at his house and that he never dropped a connection or lost anything, but that seems contrary to what he blogged on February 26, 2009, when he said that when he turned it on there was definitely some interference. However, his statement to Detective Bui denying that the magnetron/wave guide was an electronic countermeasure device because it did not work was true and there is no dispute that the experiment was found dismantled at the time of the search. There were a couple of times that Mr. Sonne could have volunteered information; for example, he did not tell Detective Bui that the chemical he was making was potassium chlorate and that was what he was drying. However, he was not asked those questions and in the circumstances it would be unreasonable to expect Mr. Sonne to provide information that had not been asked.

[177] In assessing the weight to be given to the innocent explanations provided by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui as to why he had certain chemicals or equipment, it is important to consider what Mr. Sonne said that I can determine was true. I have already made a number of preliminary findings that statements made by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui concerning his various interests are supported by the evidence and that they appear to be true. This includes Mr. Sonne’s stated interest in security issues, electronics, chemistry, air rifles, gardening, camping and fishing. I have also concluded that Mr. Sonne’s stated interest in the G20 security cameras was consistent with his interest in keeping police and security monitoring under control and ensuring that the security cameras were taken down after the G20 and not used for new police monitoring.

[178] In addition, as Mr. Di Luca submitted, Mr. Sonne gave a number of answers to Detective Bui’s questions that we now know are correct but that he would not have known the police would know the answer to. This enhances the reliability of his statement. Some examples are as follows:

a) Mr. Sonne readily acknowledged his possession of the chemicals Detective Bui asked him about and the fact that he was using an electrolysis cell and everything he told Detective Bui regarding that cell was truthful except that he did not volunteer that he was making potassium chlorate.

b) He told Detective Bui that he was making blue crystals from copper sulphate which was true.

c) Detective Bui showed Mr. Sonne photographs of what he believed was a projectile launcher. Mr. Sonne stated it was a pipe and valve that you charge with air and that he used it up at the cottage to fling potatoes into the forest. Mr. Sonne acknowledged the photo of the particle board where he had shot an onion through it and admitted that the launcher had the ability to hurt someone if it was misused but he never intended that. He said that it was simply fun that a vegetable could do this kind of damage. Mr. Sonne provided this information even though he wondered if the weapons dangerous charge related to the potato cannon. He told Detective Bui that he had looked at the regulations and determined that it did not qualify as a firearm. This projectile launcher became known as a potato cannon and it appears to be exactly what Mr. Sonne said it was. The fact there is a photograph of a potato cannon on someone’s shoulder is not significant in my view. There is no evidence it was an unlawful weapon or that anything Mr. Sonne said was not true.

d) When Detective Bui told Mr. Sonne that the experts had seen pieces of what they believed to be some kind of detonating device, Mr. Sonne said he did not know exactly what they were talking about. Later in the interview, Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that he did not think he actually had any detonating devices. Although the Crown took the position that the thermocouple was a detonating device until not long before the trial, there was no dispute before me that Mr. Sonne had no detonating device in his home.

e) He told Detective Bui that he had obtained a Possession and Acquisition Licence for a firearm but that he did not have one.

[179] Although I must assess the truth of each of Mr. Sonne’s statements, there is no positive evidence that anything Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui was not true. I also found that Mr. Sonne was very fair in many of his answers, acknowledging why the police would have concerns. For example, when Detective Bui suggested that the police would be concerned about photographs of police officers and the American Embassy and the potato cannon and the damage to pieces of particle board, Mr. Sonne fairly confirmed he could understand the concern of the police but said that he only ever had lawful intent with these things and that he had no intent to cause fear.

[180] For all of these reasons, I find that I can place some weight on the statements made by Mr. Sonne to Detective Bui and consider them for their truth in determining these charges.

[181] All of the relevant statements made by Mr. Sonne on his blog, in chats, on Twitter and Flickr, in emails and in correspondence are set out in the Chronology. They are admitted to be authentic, i.e. statements in fact made by Mr. Sonne and others, for example members of Hacklab. Mr. Di Luca submitted that these chats that are public and recorded are the best evidence of what was going on at the time. That is usually a strong argument but in this case I must consider the position of Ms. Nadeau that at least to the extent Mr. Sonne was chatting about rocketry and potassium chlorate, that it was all part of an elaborate alibi. I will consider these submissions as I make my findings of fact.

[182] Turning to the credibility of Mr. Supinski, he is clearly a good friend of Mr. Sonne’s. He is an intelligent man and seemed very concerned about saying something that would hurt Mr. Sonne’s case. Ms. Nadeau did not suggest Mr. Supinski was dishonest but I accept her submission that he was so defensive in answering some of her questions that his answers were often not responsive or they stretched the truth. I am also of the view that he was very specific in his answers responding only to how he interpreted the question. Obvious examples were the questions asked of Mr. Supinski concerning the “Tickling the Dragon” email and whether or not he knew Mr. Sonne was making potassium chlorate with an electrolysis cell. He was also evasive as to when he and Mr. Sonne planned to make a rocket together. This, of course, undermines the reliability of Mr. Supinski’s evidence. In any event he really could not add very much as to whether or not what Mr. Sonne stated on the Hacklab chats was true. Furthermore, as I have reviewed, although I accept Mr. Supinski’s interest in rockets was real, his evidence did not satisfy me that he and Mr. Sonne shared an interest in rocketry before May 2010 or that they had discussed working together on rocketry projects before then.

[183] As for the Crown witnesses, there was really no challenge to the credibility and reliability of the witnesses called by the Crown for the purpose of the trial proper, with the exception of the submissions made by Ms. Nadeau that the evidence of Dr. Anderson on the subject of propellants and rocketry was not reliable as it was outside his expertise. I have already considered that submission.

Section 82(1) of the Criminal Code – Counts 1-4 - Definition of explosive substance

[184] The central issue in determining the charges against Mr. Sonne set out in counts 1 to 4 is the definition of explosive substance. The Defence concedes that Mr. Sonne possessed the chemicals that were seized from his home. The Defence further concedes that some of the chemicals could theoretically be assembled into a substance capable of causing an explosion. However, this does not amount to possession of an explosive substance unless Mr. Sonne intended to combine these ingredients to create one of the explosive substances identified in the indictment.

[185] section 82(1) of the Criminal Code reads as follows:

Possession without lawful excuse

(1) Every person who, without lawful excuse, the proof of which lies on the person, makes or has in the possession or under the care of control of the person any explosive substance is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

[186] In this case, the parties agree that none of the substances found in Mr. Sonne’s possession are explosive substances in the sense that they could, without further action by Mr. Sonne, cause an explosion. The Crown relies on the expanded definition of explosive substance in s. 2 of the Criminal Code which provides as follows:

“explosive substance” includes

(a) Anything intended to be used to make an explosive substance,

(b) Anything, or any part thereof, used or intended to be used, or adapted to cause or to aid in causing an explosion on or with an explosive substance, and

(c) An incendiary grenade, fire bomb, Molotov cocktail or other similar incendiary substance or device and a delaying mechanism or other thing intended for use in connection with such a substance or device [emphasis added]

[187] The Crown relies in particular on subparagraphs 2(a) and (b) of the Code and has advanced a broad definition of “explosive substance.”

[188] There is very little authority considering the meaning of “explosive substance”. While s. 2 of the Code indicates that the term explosive substance is to be broadly interpreted to include such things as the component parts of an explosive substance, it does not actually define the term. For example, subparagraph (a) explains that “anything” intended to be used to make an explosive substance is an explosive substance. This definition is circular and not helpful as the Criminal Code is silent as to what exactly the “anything” must be intended to be used to make in order to be classified as an explosive substance.

[189] The Nova Scotia Youth Court in R. v. P.A.[^23] came across this problem as well. After providing a definition from Black’s Law Dictionary, the court noted the difficulty in using the definition contained in s. 2 of the Criminal Code (para. 7):

The common meaning of explosive substance is material like gunpowder: Webster's New World Dictionary (2nd Ed. 1977). Black's Law Dictionary (4th Ed. 1968) defines "explosive" as:

"any substance by whose decomposition or combustion gas is generated with such rapidity that it can be used for blasting or in firearms; or a compound or mixture susceptible or explosive chemical reaction, as gunpowder or nitroglycerine, and has been construed not to cover specific things which do explode or contain explosive material."

I refer to these definitions because of the difficulty of interpretation with the one contained in the Code. That definition indicates it includes the component parts of an explosive substance or the component parts of a device to aid or cause an explosive to be made if an explosive substance is to be used. By referring to "explosive substance" within the definition itself means that some definition outside of what it includes must be provided.

[190] The Crown submits that the following definition of explosive substance from Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, which was used by the court in R. v. H.A.Y.M.,[^24] should be adopted in this case:

A substance that on ignition by heat, impact, friction, or detonation undergoes very rapid decomposition (as combustion) with the production of heat and the formation of more stable products (as gases) which exert tremendous pressure as they expand at the high temperature produced; esp: a solid chemical compound or mixture of compounds that is used to release energy for performing work (as in blasting or propelling projectiles).

[191] The Defence does not agree, noting that this definition would capture a number of common household items including common matches and other basic firestarters. Instead, the Defence prefers the following definition: “a device that bursts with sudden violence from internal energy.” This definition is taken from R. v. K.D.S.A.[^25] In that case, the accused was charged with “possession of an explosive substance to wit: an improvised explosive device”. The New Brunswick Provincial Court ascribed the definition asserted by the defence to the word “explosive device”. The court also defined “explosive” as “relating to, characterized by, or operated by explosion.” The court concluded that, for an accused to commit a crime under s. 82(1) of the Criminal Code, there must be an explosion. The court acquitted the accused because replicated devices created by Crown experts failed to explode. Instead, they only managed to create a very large fire.

[192] The New Brunswick Court of Appeal overturned the acquittal and ordered a new trial.[^26] The court disagreed with the provincial court, finding that an explosive substance need not result in an explosion in order to be classified as such. The court concluded that the improvised explosive device seized from the accused fell within subparagraphs (b) and (c) of s. 2 of the Criminal Code.

[193] Ms. Nadeau took the position that rocket fuel is an explosive substance, relying on her proposed definition and the evidence of Dr. Anderson that, with respect to the burning of a rocket engine, the “flame is a very … robust. It is burning very rapidly.” However, when pressed she conceded that if a reasonable inference could be drawn from the evidence that Mr. Sonne was making potassium chlorate for the purpose of rocket fuel and that was his sole purpose, then he would not be guilty of count 4. It was her submission however, that even if he were making potassium chlorate for the purpose of rocket fuel, he could also be making it for an explosive substance to be used in setting off, for example, a main charge as part of an explosive train, i.e. a series of substances that when ignited would set off a main charge.

[194] Ms. Nadeau also referred to the fact that when Mr. Castellano from CAR responded to Mr. Sonne he told him that he needed a factory explosive licence to make motors and that in Canada, rocket motors are considered explosives just like fireworks. This statement was presumably based on the definition of explosives from the Explosives Act[^27] and the Explosives Regulation[^28] and is consistent with the evidence of Dr. Anderson but his evidence was that propellants were caught by this statute because of the risk of explosion, not because they are considered to be explosives.

[195] As Mr. Di Luca submitted, the Crown did not plead that Mr. Sonne was making rocket fuel or rocket engines and that those would be an explosive substance. He submitted that rocket engines can’t be an explosive substance since you can buy them and, in fact, Ms. Nadeau did so during the trial. He distinguished between a propellant and an explosive. The difference is in the substance and in the intent. If you want the substance to act as a propellant and intend it to, that is not an unlawful purpose even if something goes wrong that creates an explosion.

[196] In my view, the definition suggested by the Defence is too narrow, and the definition suggested by the Crown is too broad. With respect to the Defence definition, I note simply that the definition from K.D.S.A. was for the term “explosive device” and not “explosive substance”. Unlike an explosive device, an explosive substance does not require the presence of a device, i.e. a container. Moreover, the provincial court’s decision was overturned by the New Brunswick Court of Appeal. Part of the reason for overturning that decision was the provincial court employed erroneous definitions of “explosive substance”. Accordingly, the definitions used by the provincial court should be approached with caution.

[197] The Crown’s suggested definition is also not appropriate, as it would capture such innocuous items like aerosol cans which are usually clearly labelled that if they are heated they may explode. In this regard, I respectfully disagree with Romilly J.’s definition of explosive substance in R. v. Violette[^29] as “anything that is capable of exploding”. [Emphasis added]

[198] Considering the evidence of Dr. Anderson, and the manner in which he distinguished between propellants which have a risk of exploding and explosives which, of course, are intended to explode, I have concluded that a proper definition of the term “explosive substance” is a substance that is intended to explode and cause damage. This definition would exclude from criminal prosecution the possession of aerosol cans and other items that may explode but were never intended to explode. It would also exclude rocket fuel and rocket engines as they are not intended to explode if they are made for hobby rockets and not part of an explosive train or for that matter weaponized. By adding a requirement that there be an intention to cause damage, this definition would also exclude fireworks. If making rocket engines or, for that matter, fireworks is the purpose when someone combines certain ingredients, that person may have committed a regulatory offence because there is a risk of an explosion but in my view that person would not have had intent to create an explosive substance.

[199] The requirement that a substance must be intended to explode and cause damage in order to be classified as an explosive substance finds some support in the definition provided in s. 2 of the Criminal Code. Subparagraph (b), for example, specifies that something must be intended to be used to cause an explosion in conjunction with an explosive substance in order to be an explosive substance itself. In addition, subparagraph (c) delineates objects that are intended to be used to start fires. It does not include objects that are capable of or could result in the starting of a fire. Accordingly, I find that a substance must be intended to explode and cause damage in order to be an explosive substance.

[200] This does not mean that the Crown must prove that Mr. Sonne intended to use explosive substances to cause an explosion. That is not part of the offence of possession of an explosive substance. There is a fine distinction between intending to cause an explosion in order to cause damage and possessing substances that are intended to explode and cause damage. The first focuses on the accused individual, while the second focuses on the impugned substance. An accused will be guilty of possession of an explosive substance if the purpose of that substance’s existence is to explode and cause damage, regardless of what the accused actually intended to do with it.

Circumstantial nature of the Crown’s case

[201] The central issue in determining counts 1 – 4 is whether or not the Crown has established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne had an intention to combine any of the chemicals found in the workshop or garage of his home to create any of the six explosive substances as pleaded in the indictment. As submitted by the Defence, on the question of intent, the Crown’s case is entirely circumstantial. There is no evidence, such as a confession or other clear statement of intent, supporting Mr. Sonne’s intention to make any explosive substance. The Crown urges the Court to draw a series of inferences based on a wide variety of circumstantial evidence. The Defence, meanwhile, points to a number of alternative inferences that it submits are supported by the evidence and point to Mr. Sonne’s innocence.

[202] As Mr. Di Luca submitted, caution is required to ensure that the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt is maintained. After assessing and weighing the evidence, I may only enter a verdict of guilty if there is no other reasonable inference that can be drawn from the evidence other than those indicating that Mr. Sonne intended to make an explosive substance. If any of the Defence inferences raise at least a reasonable doubt about the Crown’s theory, Mr. Sonne must be acquitted.[^30]

[203] This approach was confirmed by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Griffin[^31] where an appeal was brought based on a trial judge’s instruction to a jury during which he stated that they should acquit if they found that there was “an equally reasonable inference which would indicate an innocent purpose.” The court upheld the finding of guilt primarily because the trial judge recalled the jury and offered a correction that read,

In order to render a verdict of guilt, based on circumstantial evidence, the guilt of the accused would have to be the only rational inference that you could draw from the circumstantial evidence.

If there’s any other rational inference you can draw from the evidence that would mean that you would not be able to render a verdict of guilty based on circumstantial evidence, because there would be – at best you would have reach maybe a probability or a likelihood of guilty, but not have reached that higher standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. (at paras. 28-34)

What were Mr. Sonne’s intentions generally with respect to the chemicals found in his home?

[204] Before turning to the specific explosive substances it is alleged that Mr. Sonne intended to make, I shall consider first the submissions of counsel that relate to the explosive substances charges as a whole. Although each of the charges against Mr. Sonne must be considered separately, I must consider the totality of the evidence in determining what his intentions were with respect to the chemicals and equipment that were found in his workshop and the garage. This analysis must be done with the important reminder that the burden is on the Crown to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne intended to combine chemicals in his possession to create an explosive substance.

[205] For the reasons already stated, I have concluded that Mr. Sonne had a legitimate interest in security issues and that given the considerable effort involved to obtain a certification as a CISSP, it would have been reasonable that Mr. Sonne would want to maintain this certification and that his interest in writing papers for TASK presentations was legitimate to further his employment prospects. I have also concluded that Mr. Sonne is an intelligent and methodical man with a large number of varied and wide ranging interests and hobbies. I have also concluded that although Mr. Sonne had the necessary knowledge and skill to make the explosive substances pleaded in the indictment, that there is nothing from the evidence concerning Mr. Sonne’s many interests, hobbies and political views that would suggest that he had any particular inclination or motive to combine any chemicals in his possession into any explosive substances. I have also found that there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne had any intention to break the law at the G20 or that any negative feelings he had about holding the G20 in Toronto and turning Toronto into a “prison camp” were strong enough to give him a motive to do actual damage at the G20 or to use an explosive substance at the G20 to damage the security fence or worse, cause injury.

[206] The strongest evidence in support of the Crown’s case is that Mr. Sonne had many different chemicals in his workshop and the garage that can be used to make explosive substances and some of the necessary equipment. Although many of the chemicals would likely be found in anyone’s garage, many others would not.

[207] As I review the individual charges, I will consider each charge individually but clearly the most troublesome charge is count 4 as Mr. Sonne had extracted almost two and one half kilograms of ammonium nitrate from cold packs and had about three kilograms of potassium chlorate that he had made using a homemade electrochemical cell. Either of these chemicals could have been combined with various types of fuel that Mr. Sonne had in his possession to create an explosive substance. As Ms. Nadeau submitted, in addition to the chemicals there was also specialized equipment, such as a filtration system and an interest in explosives and instruction manuals as evidenced by the documents Mr. Sonne had bookmarked or uploaded to The Pirate Bay such as Ragnar’s Guide to Home and Recreational Explosives which gave instruction as to the various explosive substances that could be made.

[208] For the reasons already stated, I have concluded that Mr. Sonne had the necessary chemicals and equipment to make most of the explosive substances named in the indictment. Ms. Nadeau acknowledged that there are no plans or drawings connected to a plot to use any of the chemicals for the purpose of making an explosive substance. However, as Ms. Nadeau submitted, the Crown does not have to prove that Mr. Sonne had a particular plan with respect to any explosive substances or as she put it the “what, where and when” of a possible plan to use explosive substances to cause an explosion. The Crown does not need to prove that Mr. Sonne intended to use any explosive substance. It is sufficient if the Crown has established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne had assembled some or all of these chemicals for the purpose of making any of the explosives substances set out in the indictment.

[209] Looking at the indictment as a whole, I agree with Mr. Di Luca that it seems unlikely that anyone would intend to produce six different explosive substances, as alleged. If someone intended to produce an explosive substance, one would expect one, possibly two. The fact six are pleaded reflects the fact that many of the chemicals relied upon by Dr. Anderson as ingredients to produce explosive substances could be found in many homes as they have common household purposes. I, therefore, do not consider it necessarily suspicious that Mr. Sonne would have chemicals commercially packaged as drain cleaner and various cleaning products in the garage. Furthermore, Mr. Sonne admitted to Detective Bui that he had an electrochemical cell, or as he called it an electrolysis cell, and that he was using it to make potassium chlorate. If his purpose was only to make an ingredient for rocket fuel, that in my view would not be for the purpose of making an explosive substance. Rocket fuel may result in an explosion, but it is created to propel a rocket and not to explode. As such, it is not an explosive substance for the purposes of the Criminal Code.

[210] The filtration apparatus that Mr. Sonne had on his lab desk was likely used to convert potassium chloride to potassium chlorate, which makes it less likely that there was an intention to use it to make an explosive substance like TATP or HMTD. In the same vein, the hotplate in Mr. Sonne’s workshop was needed to make the blue crystals that Mr. Sonne was making as gifts. It was, therefore, not necessarily bought for purifying TATP as suggested by Dr. Anderson. Dr. Anderson even found a possible nefarious reason for why Mr. Sonne might have steel wool at the back of his garage and personal protective equipment such as face shields, dust masks and safety goggles, all of which would not be uncommon in the garage or workshop of someone who works with wood. Stripping away from the evidence all of the chemicals and equipment that might be found in anyone’s workshop or garage, particularly someone with a broad range of interests and hobbies like Mr. Sonne, one is left with a much shorter list of chemicals of concern including the potassium permanganate, possibly the hexamine tablets and hydrogen peroxide, the urea, ammonium nitrate and the fact that Mr. Sonne was making potassium chlorate. In addition to the physical evidence, there is the considerable volume of evidence from Mr. Sonne’s computer that raises questions about his intentions that I have already considered.

Testing the System

[211] Ms. Nadeau made a number of submissions as to why the Court ought not to accept the Defence submission that Mr. Sonne was simply assembling these chemicals to “test the system”. She pointed out that there is no evidence as to who Kate Milberry really is, apart from her stated credentials at the bottom of her email that she is a post-doctoral research fellow at the University of Toronto. Ms. Milberry was not called as a witness and there is no evidence that Mr. Sonne knew Ms. Milberry personally. The Defence, however, had no obligation to call Ms. Milberry as a witness as the email exchange was admitted to be authentic. The truth of Ms. Milberry’s statements are not material to this case, only the truth of what Mr. Sonne said he had done and why.

[212] Mr. Di Luca submitted that if Mr. Sonne was, in fact, building bombs or collecting chemicals to build bombs he would not email anyone let alone Kate Milberry telling her this on a public web server. He submitted that Mr. Sonne was telling the truth about exactly what he was doing and that it would be interesting from a security culture perspective to see how far you could go before you raised red flags.

[213] Mr. Di Luca also relied on the Tickling the Dragon email Mr. Sonne sent to Hacklab members on November 4, 2009, before anyone knew the G20 was coming to Toronto. He submitted that this was another example of Mr. Sonne wanting to test the system. He was in a “civilly disobedient mood” and wanted to come up with something that would provoke a response from the government. I accept that this email is another example of Mr. Sonne as a person who wanted to push the limits of authority, even to the point of provoking a response from government, which is consistent with him wanting to test the system.

[214] Apart from these emails and other statements of Mr. Sonne to the same effect in various chats, I have no evidence from Mr. Sonne that he was “testing the system” with the purchase of any of the chemicals relied upon by the Crown. He was not asked if he was testing the system when he was asked questions by Detective Bui and to the extent he was asked about chemicals, his defence was that he had them for innocent purposes. He was not asked about the potassium permanganate by Detective Bui.

[215] Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Sonne’s comment to Ms. Milberry could have been about the rifle scope that Mr. Sonne had ordered that was stopped at the US border on February 22, 2010. I find that unlikely as it does not fit the description of what Mr. Sonne told Ms. Milberry that he was purchasing to raise flags. I presume this purchase was related to Mr. Sonne’s interest in air rifles.

[216] Mr. Sonne does not identify in his email to Ms. Milberry what he has purchased in order to raise flags. I agree with Mr. Di Luca, however, that there would be no reason at this stage for Mr. Sonne to make such a statement in an email unless it was true. He had obtained his CISSP designation and had an interest in security matters. Although I do not know if Mr. Sonne was working at this time, for reasons I have already stated, Mr. Sonne might have been looking for ways to enhance his reputation in the security field. A reasonable inference could be drawn, considering all of the evidence, that the purchase or attempted purchase of some of the chemicals by Mr. Sonne was likely to “test the system,” possibly for a paper he intended to write on the subject and present, perhaps at TASK.

[217] Ms. Nadeau submitted that if Mr. Sonne was acquiring chemicals in order to raise flags it would follow logically, and Mr. Sonne’s a logical man, that at some point he would push far enough in “tickling the dragon” that the “dragon” would come to his door. One would expect Mr. Sonne to want to protect his wife, his reputation and liberty. Ms. Nadeau submitted that as an intelligent man Mr. Sonne would not actually purchase chemicals to test the system without having some protection in place, such as a document explaining what he was doing and why, in order to provide what she described as a clear-cut alibi to establish that if he caught the attention of the police, he did not have any criminal intentions.

[218] Ms. Nadeau also submitted that if Mr. Sonne was making purchases of chemicals to test the system one would not expect him to keep them and if he did, one would not expect him to take them out of whatever commercial package that was used for sale and put them in plastic jars with the correct chemical name on the label. She argued that if Mr. Sonne was only attempting to raise flags he would have stopped after the first response when he tried to purchase potassium permanganate and not kept going until he actually got it.

[219] There is some merit in Ms. Nadeau’s submissions. The email to Ms. Milberry is the only record of Mr. Sonne stating his intention to raise flags, and that email was by chance in that it was a response to an inquiry Ms. Milberry made for people with an interest or expertise for cyber surveillance. For someone like Mr. Sonne, who based on the magnetron experiment researched his projects online and documented them in a blog, it is strange that there is no other record of this intention to raise flags. One would think Mr. Sonne would document the fact that he was ordering chemicals, nothing was happening and no flags were raised not only to protect himself but also to start on a presentation on the subject, if that was his intent. Similarly if rocketry was a legitimate interest there would be more evidence suggesting such an interest in the form of bookmarks on his computer, or even starting a blog, before Mr. Sonne started to make potassium chlorate in April 2010. There is no evidence of any record that was started of any purchases of chemicals that would support the inference that Mr. Sonne was doing so for a presentation.

[220] Furthermore, there is merit to Ms. Nadeau’s submission that Mr. Sonne appeared knowledgeable in the wording of section 82(1) of the Criminal Code, including what he believed to be the actus reus and mens rea of an offence related to explosive substances when he spoke to Detective Bui. As I have already reviewed, when Detective Bui told Mr. Sonne that he found it coincidental that as the G20 was approaching he became a member of CAR and was creating rocket fuel, Mr. Sonne responded that he wanted to prove that he had no ill intent, that he was aboveboard and that he followed the regulations and that this was why he had never assembled any of these chemicals into a finished device and that he did not possess anything that was a finished explosive. When Detective Bui responded that he possessed “the precursors,” Mr. Sonne answered “Yes, but that is not at all illegal. Not in those quantities.” At the very least this exchange shows that Mr. Sonne was alive to the issue of whether or not what he was doing was legal or not.

[221] Mr. Di Luca submitted however, that if I have a concern about Mr. Sonne’s interest in rocketry and wonder whether it is way too convenient, that I have to question whether it’s part and parcel of his testing the system. He relied on the same portion of Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui to support this submission.

[222] Although I do not find this portion of Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui to be consistent with the Defence theory that he was testing the system, I doubt Mr. Sonne was trying to tell Detective Bui that rocketry was just a cover to prove he had no ill intent. I believe it more likely that Mr. Sonne was trying to explain that if the police reviewed his correspondence with CAR that they would learn that he had no intention of making rocket fuel without a licence. This is something Mr. Sonne appreciated would not have been legal and would be something he might explain in this way to Detective Bui.

[223] In my view it is important to consider the fact that all of the chemicals Mr. Sonne had in his possession were legal from the perspective of the purchaser, and so if he had no intent to combine them into an explosive substance he may well have believed he would not need the type of alibi suggested by the Crown. There is no evidence that it is illegal to make potassium chlorate and simply have possession of this chemical. It certainly does not make sense that Mr. Sonne would have the bulk of the chemicals in a cupboard under his lab desk, labelled and in plain view, if the chemicals were being assembled for a nefarious purpose as submitted by the Crown. The electrolysis cell was in plain view in the furnace room. Even if I were to accept Ms. Nadeau’s submission that the public chats and posting of pictures was part of an elaborate alibi, one would expect some effort to hide the chemicals if Mr. Sonne had some intent to use them for a nefarious purpose.

[224] As I will come to, there is a great deal of evidence that was publically available through chats concerning Mr. Sonne’s possession of some of the chemicals including the ammonium nitrate and potassium chlorate and his interest in rocketry. Most of this evidence starts in early May 2010. Although it is of concern that these chats took place after many of the chemicals have been obtained and after Mr. Sonne began to make potassium chlorate, they start well before he began to focus on the G20 in mid-June 2010 and attract the attention of the police. This means that if the Crown theory is correct, that Mr. Sonne decided he needed an alibi before he began to focus his attention on the G20. Even if there was a reason for him to be concerned about an alibi at that time, the Crown’s theory that all of the chats were an elaborate cover or alibi begs the question of why Mr. Sonne became focused on taking photographs of police, police cameras and security fences particularly after he had caught the attention of the police once to the point of being detained on June 15, 2010 and again, according to his tweets, on June 20, 2010, when he was stopped and questioned. By these actions he clearly knew he was drawing the attention of the police which is not consistent with the actions of someone who has assembled chemicals in his lab for a nefarious intent.

[225] Dr. Anderson admitted that if someone were interested in testing the system to see whether they could raise flags, with people in authority or people who regulate chemicals, that might be a reason for acquiring some of the chemicals, but he thought it would be a bad idea. That said, he had himself tried to purchase hydrogen peroxide and he knew of one colleague who went in to make a purchase of a large quantity of hexamine tablets in order to see whether or not any flags were raised.

[226] I will deal with the potassium permanganate as Ms. Nadeau submitted that the purchase of this chemical was the start of Mr. Sonne assembling chemicals for nefarious purposes. Although it is not a chemical relied upon in the indictment, the Crown relies on the evidence of Dr. Anderson that potassium permanganate is a chemical initiation device for an explosive.

[227] In early January 2010, within days of the man dubbed the “Underwear Bomber” attempting to detonate an explosive device onboard a commercial flight using potassium permanganate, Mr. Sonne used his Visa credit card and home address to make an online purchase of two pounds of potassium permanganate from a retailer in the United States. When he was told it could not be shipped he wrote to another retailer and was told he could not purchase the product because it was a regulated product. He finally used his Visa credit card to purchase a pound of potassium permanganate from a water garden and fishery store in Bradford, Ontario.

[228] Ms. Nadeau submitted that the inference that should be drawn from this purchase of potassium permanganate is that Mr. Sonne got the idea of using potassium permanganate as an explosive from this incident with the Underwear Bomber and that this would explain why he actually bought the chemical, removed it from its original packaging, and put it in a container labelled as such.

[229] There is no doubt that Mr. Sonne is an intelligent and sophisticated man. Had he had a nefarious purpose for the potassium permanganate in mind, his decision to take steps to buy this chemical immediately after all of the news attention the Underwear Bomber received, and to attempt to do so online from a US store, using his own credit card with his own home address, would have been foolhardy in the extreme. This is particularly so given that based on Mr. Sonne’s chats, for example his chat with Shaz on June 5, 2010, he said that he knew how to hook into someone else’s wireless to upload, as he called it, “sketchy stuff” so it would be hidden. That is what one would expect if Mr. Sonne was ordering chemicals to make bombs; orders that could not be traced back to him. Furthermore, as Ms. Nadeau submitted, Mr. Sonne’s interest in documents such as the Security Culture Handbook suggests he appreciated the need for things to be hidden if the activity is illegal. For these reasons I find that the purchase of the potassium permanganate is more consistent with what Mr. Sonne said to Ms. Milberry about wanting to test the system. This could also explain the request for quotes from AlphaChem which were received January 20, 2010 for hydrogen peroxide at 35% and three types of nitric acid. Those chemicals were not found at the time of the search nor was the equipment that would be used to make nitric acid.

[230] Mr. Di Luca submitted that given the type of person Mr. Sonne is, he might purchase a chemical to test the system and then think of a perfectly legitimate way to use it for another purpose. He pointed out that Mr. Sonne joked in one of the chats that his interest in rocketry would put him on the terrorist list if he wasn’t already on it. He submitted that it is possible that even though Mr. Sonne had a legitimate interest in rocketry, it was also seen by him as a way to raise flags. That, however, would be speculation on the evidence given there is no suggestion from Mr. Sonne that making potassium chlorate was for anything other than rocket fuel.

[231] Mr. Di Luca submitted that the other chemicals including the hexamine tablets and the ammonium nitrate were also purchased to test the system. Ms. Nadeau submitted the opposite; that by buying these chemicals in small quantities Mr. Sonne was trying to avoid “tickling the dragon”. These chemicals were commercially available for innocent purposes; the hexamine as camp fuel and the ammonium nitrate in cold packs. The only records available to the Court of purchases of these chemicals are for small quantities in January and March 2010 which is before Mr. Sonne’s email to Ms. Milberry. As Mr. Di Luca submitted, it is possible that the bulk of these chemicals were purchased all at once, with the aim to raise flags, and that we simply don’t have a record of that. It is also possible that Mr. Sonne bought all of these chemicals in small quantities under the radar to establish that this could be done without raising flags. That might have been part of a future presentation. Dr. Anderson, in fact, expressed concern about the fact that ammonium nitrate could be obtained from buying cold packs. However, when Mr. Sonne was asked about these chemicals by Detective Bui, that is not the explanation that he gave for why he had them. Given the competing inferences, I shall consider these particular chemicals in the context of the statement from Mr. Sonne as to why he had them and the rest of the evidence.

The Public Nature of his Actions

[232] In considering Mr. Sonne’s intent generally with respect to the chemicals relied upon by the Crown, it is relevant that for many of the purchases the Crown relies upon, he used his Visa credit card, rather than cash. Furthermore, as set out in the Chronology, he often posted pictures of what he bought or posted comments about it on the Hacklab chat. If you build a bomb and set it off people are going to come to your door and in Mr. Sonne’s case that would happen given he used his own name, credit card and home address and he had a lab in his house with the chemicals in plain view. Mr. Di Luca submitted that had Mr. Sonne felt he needed a cover, a better cover would be not to tell anyone and do this somewhere other than your home. I agree that this is what would make sense.

[233] Mr. Sonne stated in the Hacklab chats that he had been subject to RCMP checks three times. I have no evidence as to whether that would have been true when Mr. Sonne obtained his licence as a private investigator and his CISSP designation although that would not be surprising. There is no doubt, however, that he would have expected to have a police check when he applied for his licence to acquire a firearm in around April 2010. This is not what I would expect from someone who, on the Crown’s theory, had begun to assemble chemicals for nefarious purposes.

[234] It is of concern that in September 2009, when Mr. Sonne ordered the Ragnar’s Guide to Home and Recreational Use of High Explosives, he also uploaded various maps of the United States including maps showing the location of what appear to be nuclear sites, oil refineries, chemical depots and gas pipelines. The timing of these events could also have been consistent, however, with “testing the system” and Mr. Sonne’s disposition to test the limits of authority. Around the same time, he commented on The Pirate Bay that “the second they start throwing us in jail for posting stuff like this (a reference to his uploading US nuclear sites onto The Pirate Bay) I arm up and start the revolution”.

[235] The concern in connection with the charges before the Court is obvious given the possible suggestion Mr. Sonne now had both possible targets and a book explaining how to make certain explosives. However, this is also consistent with his somewhat extreme form of exercising one’s right to freedom of speech. Although posting this type of information on a public forum on the Internet is not illegal, it certainly could be considered irresponsible. However, in terms of the charges before the Court, if Mr. Sonne had, in fact, purchased Ragnar’s Guide for the purpose of actually making explosives, one wonders why he would go public with having it. Why even buy it at all? According to Dr. Anderson, there are lots of recipes for explosive substances on the Internet.

[236] Posting Ragnar’s Guide to The Pirate Bay could have been part of what Mr. Sonne said to Kate Milberry on April 26, 2010, and his statement that he kept torrents going of interest to countersurveillance and activist security culture and other “sketchy stuff” and that he monitored those torrents to see how active they would get as various political situations arose, including when government IPs popped up. This could be part of “testing the system” and might tie into a paper on security issues.

[237] Again, there are competing inferences from this evidence which I shall consider as I consider the charges before this Court.

The Risk

[238] Ms. Nadeau also submitted that if Mr. Sonne was in fact intending a legitimate purpose with the chemicals, it is unreasonable to think that he would bring such volatile, dangerous chemicals into a residential neighbourhood and into a home that he shared with his wife. However, Ms. Nadeau also took a contrary position and submitted that Mr. Sonne was confident that even though the bombs he was intending on building were dangerous, he was following the necessary safety regulations to be safe.

[239] There was no evidence from Dr. Anderson that anything Mr. Sonne was doing in the workshop would cause a risk of harm to him or his wife. He did not suggest any of the chemicals themselves could explode nor did he suggest there was any risk in making potassium chlorate. As I will come to, Mr. Sonne had become concerned about the potassium chlorate, possibly because of posts by other Hacklab members, and he decided to bury that substance in a pail in the backyard. Apart from the fact that potassium chlorate is toxic, there is no other evidence that it would have posed a danger to Mr. Sonne or his wife, had he kept it in his basement.

[240] It is, however, clear from the evidence of Dr. Anderson, that there would have been significant risk if Mr. Sonne had started to combine these chemicals to make at least some of the explosive substances pleaded in the indictment, such as TATP. That would have put not only himself but his wife and no doubt his neighbours at risk. Although I am not able to ascertain how sincere Mr. Sonne was when he told Detective Bui that he would be concerned for his neighbours, I have already found in my ruling on the admissibility of his statements that he felt very strongly about his wife. I do not believe that he would have done anything to risk injury to her or worse. The information Mr. Sonne had on making explosive substances such as the Ragnar’s Guide, talked about the risks involved. There is no evidence that Mr. Sonne had any other place where he could safely assemble these chemicals into an explosive substance. I find it highly unlikely that he would have put his wife, let alone the home they shared, to the risk that is inherent in making an explosive substance in his home.

[241] There is no evidence that the required ingredients for any particular explosive named in the indictment were set out and separated on top of the workbench or some other workspace. It was not as if it appeared that Mr. Sonne was ready to start combining any of the chemicals into an explosive substance. There is also no evidence that anything had been done to get any of the ingredients ready to be combined into an explosive substance. The only active step that appears to have been taken is the production of potassium chlorate. Although the Crown does not have to prove that Mr. Sonne intended to use an explosive substance to disrupt the G20, the fact that nothing was found ready to go at the time of the search would suggest otherwise in any event. In fact, given the time Mr. Sonne was obviously devoting to photographing security cameras and the G20 fence line, it would seem unlikely that he would have very much time to work in his lab.

[242] I do not have any evidence as to how difficult it would be to combine some of the oxidizing agents Mr. Sonne had, such as the potassium chlorate and ammonium nitrate, with a fuel and do that away from his home and create an explosive substance. I am not able to conclude on the evidence that Mr. Sonne would have had to put his wife and home at risk to proceed to the next stage of assembling some of these explosives.

[243] With these general comments in mind, I turn to the individual charges.

Findings of fact/conclusion – Count 1 – TATP

[244] Turning to count 1, the Crown must establish beyond a reasonable doubt not only that Mr. Sonne had in his possession the ingredients required to make TATP; namely acetone, hydrogen peroxide and an acid, which can be either sulphuric acid or hydrochloric acid, but also that he had the intention to combine those ingredients into TATP. There is no dispute that TATP is an explosive substance.

[245] This count can be quickly disposed of in Mr. Sonne’s favour as the Crown has not proven that the two bottles commercially labelled “acetone” and found in the garage of Mr. Sonne’s home, in fact, contained acetone. Indeed, the Crown has not proven that the bottles contained any liquid at all. This in my view is a fatal flaw to the Crown’s case on count 1.

[246] Ms. Nadeau submits that it was unnecessary to test the contents of the containers and that the fact that the bottles were labelled as acetone is sufficient to establish that the bottles contained acetone. Ms. Nadeau relies on H.A.Y.M. as authority for this proposition. However, H.A.Y.M. does not support the Crown’s argument. In that case, the accused was charged with possession of an explosive substance. Numerous chemical substances were found in his possession, but no chemical analysis was done on any of them. The trial judge did not find this necessary because some of the chemical substances were found to explode upon testing by police. This was sufficient for the trial judge to conclude that the accused was in possession of an explosive substance.

[247] Ms. Nadeau seeks to extend the conclusion of the trial judge in H.A.Y.M. beyond its intended meaning. The chemical identities of the substances in that case did not need to be found because the substances were found to be explosive substances. That is not the case here. The chemical identity of the liquid in the bottles labelled as “acetone” is essential to the Crown’s case, since its theory is that Mr. Sonne had all the requisite ingredients to make TATP. If the liquid in the “acetone” bottles was not, in fact, acetone, then the Crown’s theory on this count fails.

[248] The fact that the cans were labelled as acetone is some evidence that the liquid inside, if any, was acetone. However, I cannot be sure that Mr. Sonne had any acetone in his possession let alone acetone that was suitable for TATP production. As mentioned already, there is no evidence that the bottles contained any liquid. In addition, one of the bottles was labelled “used acetone”. Dr. Anderson admitted that acetone could become unsuitable for TATP production if it is adulterated through combination with other chemicals. Lastly, there is the possibility that the liquid inside, if any, was something other than acetone.

[249] However, I will still consider the other relevant evidence with respect to this count since overall the Crown’s case requires proof of intent to combine these various chemicals into explosive substances. As such, the other chemicals Mr. Sonne had might shed some light generally on his intent.

[250] A four litre original commercial container, “Optimum Hydrogen Peroxide 29%” was found on the same shelf as the other bottles of chemicals in the cupboard under the lab desk. It was tested and could have been used to make TATP or HMTD. Although I do wonder why this bottle was kept with the other chemicals, rather than, for example, out in the garage, based on the labelling it was sold as a liquid fertilizer. Although Mr. Sonne obtained a quote from AlphaChem for 35% hydrogen peroxide on January 20, 2010, there is no evidence that he ever ordered or received this product and I have already found this purchase may have been an attempt to “test the system”. I have already made a finding that Mr. Sonne’s statement to Detective Bui that he has an interest in farming and gardening could well be true. He was not asked about this chemical by Detective Bui, but in light of its commercially intended purpose, I could not conclude that Mr. Sonne purchased the hydrogen peroxide for the purpose of making TATP or HMTD. A reasonable inference can be made from all of the evidence that the hydrogen peroxide was bought for its intended purpose as fertilizer. It may have been stored in this cupboard because that is where the urea and ammonium nitrate were found and Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that these chemicals were intended to be used as fertilizer for his vegetable garden.

[251] As for the acids relied upon to make TATP or HMTD, they were found on the shelves at the back of the garage and both were in their original commercial container; one labelled “ro-tyme Liquid Drain Opener” for use in unclogging drains and tested as sulphuric acid and the other “ro-tyme Muriatic Acid”, which was identified as hydrochloric acid and labelled for use for, among other things, etching and descaling. In addition, a commercially labelled container of Methyl Hydrate was found on the floor of the garage near the shelves. Although this solvent could be used to purify TATP the fact remains it is a solvent and on the label of the bottle it states that this chemical is best for preventing gas line freezing and that it can be used for cleaning glass surfaces and thinning shellac and cleaning brushes. Dr. Anderson confirmed the household uses for these three products and given where they were stored and the fact they were in their original containers, it is certainly likely that they had been purchased for their intended household uses. These are the kinds of chemicals anyone could have in their basement or garage. There was no admission that everything in the garage belonged to Mr. Sonne and not his wife, but in any event, even if these products belonged to Mr. Sonne, I am not satisfied on the evidence that they were purchased for the purpose of making TATP or HMTD or any explosive substance.

[252] For these reasons, I find that the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne is guilty of count 1.

Findings of fact/conclusion – Count 2 – HMTD

[253] Turning to count 2, the Crown must prove that Mr. Sonne had the ingredients and the intention to make HMTD; namely hexamine, hydrogen peroxide and an acid. The standard acid used is citric acid, which was not found in Mr. Sonne’s home even though it is easily available in a drugstore. That suggests there was no intent to make such an explosive although, according to Dr. Anderson, hydrochloric acid or sulphuric acid will do. I have already reviewed the evidence with respect to those two acids and the hydrogen peroxide which were found in the garage of 58 Elderwood Drive and have concluded that the Crown has not proven that they were for anything other than their intended commercial purpose.

[254] The central issue on this count is for what purpose Mr. Sonne had the hexamine tablets that were found in two screw top plastic jars in his workshop. Although I have the weight of these tablets, I do not know the number of tablets in those containers. All that has been established is that Mr. Sonne purchased four packages of hexamine tablets on January 29, 2010 and another four packages on March 22, 2010. Given the number of tablets in each container, this would mean that he had purchased 240 tablets which could well be what is seen in the plastic containers.

[255] Although Mr. Sonne used his Visa credit card both times, given that these packages are available in the camping section of Canadian Tire, I fail to see how he could have expected to raise flags with these purchases, unless he wanted to establish that such a chemical is not regulated and easily available. Dr. Anderson did testify that the ability of someone to acquire a large quantity of hexamine tablets without anyone having to report it is something that raises a security concern for him. However, when asked about the hexamine tablets by Detective Bui, Mr. Sonne responded that camp stove fuel tablets can be bought at Canadian Tire and are entirely legal. Implicit in this statement is that he bought these tablets for their intended purpose.

[256] In my view, the question then is whether or not the hexamine tablets were purchased for use by Mr. Sonne for camping or intended to be a main ingredient in the production of HMTD and / or HDN. It is significant that the two containers of hexamine tablets were not found with the other chemicals under Mr. Sonne’s lab desk. Although it is not entirely clear where they originally were, as they were moved by police by the time the photographs of them were taken, given the evidence that items on the floor shown in the photographs had been moved off the shelves, it seems most likely that before the search, the jars of hexamine fuel tablets were on the shelf with the camping equipment.

[257] It is significant that Mr. Sonne labelled the fuel tablets as being “hexamine” fuel tablets, clearly indicating he knew what chemical they were made from. On the other hand, the fact that he included the words “fuel tablets” suggests that that was the intended purpose for these tablets. In the case of the other chemicals, there was no stated or intended purpose in the labelling itself.

[258] I find it unlikely that the hexamine tablets were intended for use with the camp stove found with the camping equipment as the fuel canisters that were also present are clearly the type of fuel that stove is intended for. However, Dr. Anderson did testify that these tablets can be used to start a campfire or charcoal briquettes or lump charcoal; all activities associated with camping.

[259] Ms. Nadeau submitted that it would not make sense for Mr. Sonne to purchase these tablets in January and March nor have so many tablets and move them into large jars which would be unwieldy for camping. It is true that certainly the January purchase was not at a time when I would expect Mr. Sonne to need these tablets for camping, but he appears to be a very organized person, judging from how things were stored in his workshop and he told Detective Bui that he had brought the air rifles home to work on over the winter. The fact he purchased the tablets when he did is not inconsistent with Mr. Sonne getting organized early for the cottage and camping season; obviously the tablets were still on the store shelves. As for moving the tablets to jars, this would likely be a more efficient way of transporting these fuel tablets to the cottage, than eight individual boxes. Furthermore, Dr. Anderson agreed that the jars appear to be watertight, which is a useful feature considering that hexamine tablets that are dissolved in water become useless as a fuel source.

[260] For these reasons, I find that a reasonable inference can be drawn from this evidence that the hexamine tablets were purchased by Mr. Sonne for their intended use for camping and, in particular, for starting campfires. For these reasons, the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the hexamine tablets were purchased by Mr. Sonne with an intention to create HMTD. In addition, as I have already stated, a reasonable inference can be drawn from the evidence that Mr. Sonne had the other chemicals the Crown relies upon in support of count 2 in his possession, for their stated purposes, as commercially labelled. Accordingly, I find that the Crown has not established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne had these ingredients in his possession for the purpose of making HMTD.

[261] For these reasons, I find that the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne is guilty of count 2.

Findings of fact/conclusion – Count 3 – Urea Nitrate

[262] Turning to count 3, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne had the ingredients to make urea nitrate and the intention to combine those ingredients into that explosive substance. There is no dispute that Mr. Sonne had one of the necessary ingredients, namely urea, but he did not have the other; nitric acid.

[263] The urea was found in a plastic screw top jar that was hand labelled “Urea” in addition to the correct chemical nomenclature, in the cupboard under the lab desk. The quantity was 842 grams. No nitric acid was found in Mr. Sonne’s home. Dr. Anderson was not asked about the January 20, 2010 quote Mr. Sonne obtained from AlphaChem for nitric acid using different product numbers. There is no evidence that any of these products were ever ordered or shipped. It is significant that this quote was obtained for Mr. Sonne’s company using his own name and home address. This quote was obtained in the same timeframe as when the potassium permanganate was purchased, which I have already found suggests it was a chemical that was being sourced to “test the system”.

[264] Dr. Anderson did give evidence that it would have been possible for Mr. Sonne to make nitric acid using hydrochloric acid and potassium nitrate. I have already set out the evidence with respect to the hydrochloric acid that was found in the garage and why I am not satisfied that it was purchased in order to make an explosive substance. There is some significance to the fact that the potassium nitrate was found with the other chemicals in the cupboard under the counter of the lab desk, but Mr. Sonne did not have the distillation apparatus that would normally be used to make nitric acid. There is no evidence from Dr. Anderson to suggest that purchasing such an apparatus would have been difficult and certainly Mr. Sonne had access to online lab equipment suppliers. Dr. Anderson explained how nitric acid could be made without this type of apparatus and I accept that Mr. Sonne would have been sufficiently skilled to do so. However, it seems less likely that Mr. Sonne would have intended to make nitric acid without the distillation apparatus. If he had such an intention, judging from all of the lab equipment he did have, I would have expected him to have bought distillation equipment. The absence of this equipment certainly raises a reasonable doubt as to whether or not Mr. Sonne ever had an intention to make nitric acid.

[265] When asked, Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that the urea was for use as a fertilizer in his garden. Dr. Anderson did not suggest that the quantity Mr. Sonne had was at odds with such a purpose. Mr. Sonne was not asked about the potassium nitrate but Dr. Anderson testified that it too could be used as a fertilizer, for pyrotechnics, as a food preservative, and as a stump remover.

[266] I have already concluded that it is reasonable to infer from the evidence that Mr. Sonne did, in fact, have an interest in gardening. It is perhaps unusual that the urea was in a plastic jar with the other chemicals, but as I have already said, the hydrogen peroxide which was marketed as a liquid fertilizer was there as well. It is possible that the potassium nitrate was also for fertilizing a garden. The urea and ammonium nitrate were in the same cupboard and Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui that these chemicals were also intended as a fertilizer. As I will come to, he gave Detective Bui an explanation for why he had more than one kind of fertilizer for his vegetable garden.

[267] Given Mr. Sonne’s interest in gardening and his statements to Detective Bui, I find that a reasonable inference can be drawn from the evidence that what Mr. Sonne told Detective Bui is true and that he had the urea in his possession for use as a fertilizer.

[268] For these reasons the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne had urea in his possession for the purpose of making an explosive substance and as such has not proven count 3 as it relates to urea nitrate.

Findings of fact/conclusion – Count 3 – HDN

[269] Count 3 also alleges that Mr. Sonne had the ingredients to make HDN; namely hexamine and nitric acid. I have already set out my conclusions with respect to the other reasonable inference that could be drawn from the evidence as to why Mr. Sonne had hexamine tablets and I have concluded that I have a reasonable doubt as to whether or not Mr. Sonne ever intended to make nitric acid from potassium nitrate and hydrochloric acid and my conclusions with respect to why Mr. Sonne may have had those chemicals.

[270] Given my conclusion that a reasonable inference can be drawn from the evidence that Mr. Sonne may have had hexamine, hydrochloric acid and potassium nitrate in his possession for reasons other than the manufacture of an explosive substance, the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne intended to make HDN.

[271] For these reasons the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne is guilty of count 3 as it relates to HDN.

Findings of fact/conclusion – Count 4 – Potassium Chlorate

[272] Turning to count 4, the Crown must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Sonne intended to make an oxidizer-based explosive substance using potassium chlorate.

[273] In light of the definition for the term “explosive substance” in section 82(1) of the Criminal Code, I have concluded that rocket fuel is not an explosive substance if it is not intended to explode and cause damage. However, as Ms. Nadeau submitted, it might be possible to use a rocket engine to ignite a detonator which, in turn, could set off a main charge. If a rocket engine were intended to be used in that way, then it could meet the definition of an explosive substance as set out in s. 2(b) of the Code. Accordingly, if I am left with a reasonable doubt as to whether or not Mr. Sonne intended to use the potassium chlorate that he had made for rocket fuel, for a recreational rocket, or if I am unable to determine what his purpose was in making potassium chlorate, he must be acquitted of this charge.

The physical evidence

[274] Potassium chlorate is a strong oxidizing agent that can be mixed with various fuels such as sugar to form explosive substances. It is clear from the evidence that Mr. Sonne had learned the process for using an electrochemical cell to turn potassium chloride into potassium chlorate. Potassium chloride can be legally purchased as salt and although Mr. Sonne posted frustration at being able to buy it, there is no suggestion from the evidence that any “red flags” would be raised if one purchased this salt in large quantities as it is used for water softening. Dr. Anderson testified that potassium chlorate is a restricted chemical substance in quantities over one kilogram and is, therefore, difficult to accumulate, which would explain why Mr. Sonne needed to make it.

[275] It is clear from the evidence that Mr. Sonne had the ingredients to make a potassium chlorate based explosive substance. He had almost three kilograms of potassium chlorate at the time of his arrest; a little over a kilogram in his workshop found at the time of the initial search and 1.7 kilograms buried in a pail in his backyard that was found after the conclusion of the trial. He also had many possible fuels available to him including aluminum powder. This raises serious questions. However, it is also clear from the evidence of Dr. Anderson, that potassium chlorate can be used as rocket fuel when mixed with a fuel. As already stated, the regulations that prohibit the sale of potassium chlorate in quantities over one kilogram govern the vendor and there is no evidence of any regulations that prohibit the simple possession of potassium chlorate. In any event, breach of a regulation would not assist in determining what Mr. Sonne intended to do with the potassium chlorate.

[276] Most of the fuels that could be used with potassium chlorate would be found in anyone’s home and so their presence in Mr. Sonne’s home could not suggest they were going to be used for a nefarious purpose. However, 479 grams of aluminum powder in what appeared to be its original container labelled “Alumilite Aluminum Powder” was found in the cupboard under the counter of the lab desk and Dr. Anderson explained how it could be used in combination with the potassium chlorate and other chemicals to create an explosive substance. The label on this jar states that it is ground aluminum used to thicken or extend the volume of aluminite casting plastic and that it is used to make the finished parts heavier and gives them an aluminum look. It warns that a face mask should be worn when using the product. During a Hacklab chat on May 29, 2010, during a discussion about the Danvers explosion, someone mentioned dust explosions and, in particular, aluminum dust and Mr. Sonne responded that he had some for mixing with epoxy and that it was not to be treated lightly. This could provide an innocent explanation for why Mr. Sonne had aluminum powder. Clearly it was being marketed for legitimate uses.

[277] Ms. Nadeau submitted that Mr. Sonne had advanced to full scale home production of potassium chlorate with a great deal of effort, time and money. There is evidence of three different electrochemical cells that Mr. Sonne made which is detailed in the Chronology. There are photographs of what appears to be a fairly small cell which Mr. Di Luca suggested was likely Mr. Sonne’s first. It seems that he then built a much larger electrolysis cell with what appears to be a graphite rod in a yellow bucket lid and likely that is the one that did not work so well; pictures of this were posted and Mr. Sonne posted on the Hacklab chats that he had tried one and it didn’t work well as it resulted in bleach. It appears that he then made a third cell which is the version that was in place in the furnace room and was seized by police.

[278] I have considered whether or not what appears to be the largest electrochemical cell, namely the one with a yellow bucket lid, is evidence that Mr. Sonne was ramping up for a larger electrochemical cell. I have concluded that this is not likely the case. There are photographs Mr. Sonne posted to Hacklab on May 18, 2010, that show it assembled but by the time of the search the bottom of the bucket was not located. Although the order of the cells does not really matter, the fact Mr. Sonne experimented with three different cells would certainly suggest considerable effort and time had been expended in experimenting with how to make potassium chlorate. It does not appear, however, that there was a great deal of expense involved with making the potassium chlorate. In fact, in one of the Hacklab chats on May 29, 2010, Mr. Sonne outlined the various costs and claimed to have spent $160 for the rig to make potassium chlorate, not including the cost of the salt.

Was there a real interest in rocketry or was rocketry an elaborate cover?

[279] It is the Crown’s position that all of the chats Mr. Sonne posted about rocketry in May and June 2010 and his decision to join CAR and NAPAS and his email correspondence to National Resources Canada (”NRC”) were an elaborate cover and that his real intent was to use potassium chlorate to make an explosive substance.

[280] In the Chronology, I detail all of the posts Mr. Sonne made on the Hacklab chat about making potassium chlorate for rocket fuel that were entered into evidence by the Defence. Although I have no evidence that there were no earlier posts, that would certainly be a reasonable assumption as the posts I do have, for the most part, seem to introduce the topic, rather than continue a dialogue from before.

[281] Although the chats have been admitted to be authentic in that they accurately record what Mr. Sonne and others were saying on the days in question, I have very little evidence from Mr. Supinski corroborating what Mr. Sonne was saying, in that he distanced himself from what Mr. Sonne was doing as expressed in the chats. Furthermore, for reasons already given, I did not find his evidence of assistance in determining what Mr. Sonne’s real intentions were.

[282] Ms. Nadeau submitted that there is no evidence of any interest in rockets; no model rockets or model rocket parts were found at the time of the search. D.C. Albrecht testified that in his search of the house and observations of the house he did not find anything that resembled a rocket or that he thought could be made into a rocket. D.C. Ouellette did not see anything related to model rockets on Mr. Sonne’s computer. There was, however, nothing in the search warrant that specified searching for items or documents relating to rockets. However, although items related to rockets were not listed in the search warrant as items to be seized, it is reasonable to infer that the police would have seized items related to rocketry had they been present given the search was in part related to explosive substances. They did, for example, seize the hydraulic jack Mr. Sonne had purchased for the purpose of pressing rocket engines. The Defence introduced photographs of the search of the house and garage and it would seem photographs were taken of all of the rooms. There is no other obvious evidence of rocket parts or books on rockets.

[283] Ms. Nadeau also submitted that if Mr. Sonne really intended to build his own rocket he would not start with making the fuel when he had not yet designed and finished a rocket. He wouldn’t know the shape or size of the rocket or what size the rocket engine would have to be. However, as Mr. Di Luca submitted, it cannot be assumed that you would build the rocket first and then the motor. It is just as likely you would build the motor first and determine its capabilities before designing the rocket. He also suggested that it could be that Mr. Supinski was working out the aeronautic systems while Mr. Sonne worked on the rocket fuel. The problem with that theory is Mr. Supinski disavowed any knowledge of what Mr. Sonne was doing. Nevertheless, I would not conclude that it is unreasonable for someone with Mr. Sonne’s interests to start by making ingredients for the rocket engine first.

[284] The earliest possible reference to hobby rocketry in Mr. Sonne’s computer appears to be January 10, 2010, when he created a folder in his bookmark history called “The Chlorates and Perchlorates” which was later moved into a folder created on January 19, 2010 called “Chemistry, Distilling, Rocketry, Energetics”. This document relates to the use of electrolysis to make chlorates. The next possible addition is a bookmark for a bucket cell adapter which was added May 2, 2010 which describes a bucket cell adaptor as a standard bucket with a flat bucket lid with holes drilled in and an opening to allow for electrodes, venting, and sampling. This article discusses the use of graphite anodes but there is a picture that shows a cathode made of mesh referred to as “MMO” which is similar to the Ziploc bag found in Mr. Sonne’s workshop labelled “TI-MMO”. This suggests this article was used by Mr. Sonne for experimenting with his homemade electrochemical cells. Both of these bookmarks related to electrochemical cells but again this begs the question of whether the interest