CITATION: R. v. Ievgen Tereshchuk, 2015 ONSC 3355

COURT FILE NO.: 13-50000 522 DATE: 20150605

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

– and –

IEVGEN TERESHCHUK

Counsel: Carolyn Fineberg, for Her Majesty The Queen Janice R. Johnson, for Ievgen Tereshchuk

HEARD: April 20-24, May 25 and 27, 2015

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

Dunnet J.: (Orally):

Overview

[1] The accused Ievgen Tereshchuk has been charged with two counts of robbery.

The Evidence

Usman Mohy-ud-din

[2] On March 19, 2012, Usman Mohy-ud-din was working as a taxi driver for Kingsboro Taxi. At about 10:25 p.m. two men flagged him down on Lake Shore Boulevard West at Fourth Street in Toronto. They entered the back seat of the taxi and were talking to one another in a language that Mohy-ud-din did not understand.

[3] The man sitting behind the driver’s seat directed Mohy-ud-din to drive to the CN Tower. When they arrived, the man told Mohy-ud-din to turn right onto Navy Wharf Court, right onto Blue Jays Way and to stop at the Renaissance Downtown Toronto Hotel.

[4] The man in the rear driver’s seat put his left hand over the top of Mohy-ud-din’s seat and grabbed onto Mohy-ud-din’s right shoulder. He put his right hand on the right side of Mohy-ud-din’s neck and, in the rear view mirror, Mohy-ud-din saw something made of steel sticking into his neck.

[5] The man said, “Give me the money.” Mohy-ud-din took $135 and a debit receipt from a box in the centre console of the taxi and passed it back to the man sitting in the rear passenger seat. The man holding him asked Mohy-ud-din for the money in his wallet. He took out Pakistani currency in rupees and passed the paper money back to the man in the rear passenger seat.

[6] The man holding him demanded his cell phone and Mohy-ud-din passed a cell phone back to the man in the rear passenger seat. The man holding him demanded his car keys and Mohy-ud-din passed keys back to the man in the rear passenger seat.

[7] The men took everything but the debit receipt, left the taxi and ran south towards Bremner Boulevard. Mohy-ud-din said that they did not smell of alcohol or slur their words and they did not have any difficulty running away. He retrieved another key and drove the taxi towards Bremner where he saw the men walking eastbound on Bremner. He telephoned 911.

[8] In the 911 call, Mohy-ud-din said that during the robbery, “they” held him and took his money, car keys and cell phone. One of the suspects held something against his neck and he confirmed that it looked like a screwdriver. He said that he was not hurt.

[9] Mohy-ud-din testified that the man sitting in the rear driver’s seat was white, 28 to 30 years old, 5’8”, weighing 80 kilograms, of medium build with three to four days’ growth of facial hair. The man sitting in the rear passenger seat was white, 28 years old, 5’8”, weighing 75 to 80 kilograms, of medium build with two to three days’ growth of facial hair. He was dressed in jeans and a shirt. Mohy-ud-din identified the accused as the man in the rear passenger seat.

[10] He testified that his taxi was equipped with an onboard CCTV camera that captured still photographic images automatically. When he was shown images captured between 10:28 p.m. and 10:44 p.m., he identified the accused as the man in the rear passenger seat.

[11] In cross-examination, Mohy-ud-din agreed that in preparation for trial, he had been shown images of the men captured by the camera inside the taxi. He maintained that he was able to see their faces, but not constantly because he was driving and looking ahead.

[12] He agreed that on March 19, 2012, during his video statement to the police, he said:

Oh that time the bi’-the guy ho’- holding me said okay where is the money so give me money he ah he was speaking the other guy was, was taking the mon’-when I gave it to him he picked all the money and gave it to that guy.

[13] Mohy-ud-din testified that when he passed the money back, the man in the rear driver’s seat was holding him with both hands. Mohy-ud-din could feel someone taking the money from his hand and he assumed that it was the accused.

[14] He agreed that the image captured at 10.44.15 p.m. shows the accused in the rear passenger seat and the man in the rear driver’s seat with his right hand near the right side of Mohy-ud-din’s neck. Mohy-ud-din testified that he is holding his right hand in the air and telling them that he did not have any more money. He said that at that point, he had given them the money in the console and the rupees in his wallet.

[15] He agreed that during the preliminary inquiry, he testified that after he gave them his money, the man in the rear driver’s seat was holding him and the accused opened the door first. In his testimony, he maintained that the men opened both rear doors and ran away together and he confirmed that the images captured five seconds later at 10.44.20 p.m. do not show anyone sitting in the rear driver or rear passenger seats.

Ahmed Gaal

[16] On March 19, 2012, Ahmed Gaal was working as a taxi driver for Kingsboro Taxi. Shortly before midnight, two men flagged him down on Lake Shore Boulevard West between Royal York Boulevard and Islington Avenue in Toronto. They entered the back seat and were talking to one another in a language that Gaal did not understand.

[17] The man sitting behind the driver’s seat directed Gaal to drive westbound to Hurontario Street in Mississauga. When they arrived, he told Gaal to continue driving westbound on Lakeshore Road. At Winston Churchill Boulevard in Oakville, Gaal stopped the taxi and said, “Where are you going?” The man in the rear driver’s seat said that they were looking for a nightclub. He told Gaal to turn around and drive eastbound on Lake Shore.

[18] When they reached Islington, he directed Gaal to turn north and then east on Birmingham Street. East of Dwight Avenue, Birmingham becomes Murrie Street and at 54 Murrie, he told Gaal to stop the taxi.

[19] The man in the rear passenger seat put his right arm around Gaal’s neck. He held a knife against the left side of Gaal’s face and said, “I’m going to kill you.” Gaal said, “What do you want?” The man in the rear driver’s seat said, “Give me money.” Gaal passed back $115, but he did not know who took the money. He testified that the man behind him said, “Give me wallet,” and Gaal replied, “I don’t carry a wallet. This is my money. Don’t kill me please. I have a camera.”

[20] The man in the rear passenger seat got out of the taxi and the man in the rear driver’s seat put his arms around Gaal’s neck. The rear passenger opened the driver’s front door and demanded his wallet, striking Gaal in the face and left shoulder. Gaal was yelling, “Help, help,” hoping that someone in the nearby houses would hear him.

[21] The man in the rear driver’s seat demanded his car keys and Gaal complied. When he demanded Gaal’s cell phone, Gaal could not find it in the melée. The man in the rear driver’s seat said that they should go and the men walked along Murrie towards Royal York Road. Gaal located his cell phone, got out of his taxi, and started running. Then he called 911.

[22] During the 911 call, Gaal was very emotional. He told the operator that he was robbed by two men who took his money and car keys. The man wearing a black jacket held a knife to his head and “pushed” his face. He was not hurt.

[23] In his testimony, Gaal described the man sitting in the rear passenger seat as white, 25 to 30 years old and wearing a black jacket. He identified the accused as the man with the knife and the man who kicked him in the face. He described the knife as yellow and wooden with a black bottom and medium blade.

[24] Gaal described the man sitting in the rear driver’s seat as white, 23 to 26 years old, and weighing 125 to 130 pounds. He had brown hair, a small build, and he was not tall. He spoke with a Russian accent.

[25] Gaal testified that the men smelled like “dirt,” as if they had not brushed their teeth for a long time. They also smelled like alcohol, but they were not drunk.

[26] In cross-examination, Gaal testified that as he turned around to tell them that the cost of the fare was $72, he saw the knife in the accused’s hand. The accused put his arm around Gaal’s neck and held the knife against his throat.

[27] Gaal agreed that in preparation for trial, he had been shown the photographic images captured on the camera inside his taxi. He agreed that he was told by the police that the accused’s fingerprints were found on the driver’s door handle.

Police Officer Joseph Kovacic

[28] On March 20, 2012, Police Officer Joseph Kovacic was working at Toronto Police Service 22 Division when he received a radio call at 00:53 a.m. about a robbery of a Kingsboro taxi driver at 54 Murrie. The victim said that he picked up two men, possibly of Polish or Russian descent. The man wearing a black jacket held a knife to his face and took his keys and $120.

[29] Five minutes later, Kovacic arrived at 54 Murrie and was told by Gaal that he last saw the men heading west on Murrie. At 1:08 a.m., Kovacic saw a man walking alone in an alleyway between Dwight and Second Street, a short distance from 54 Murrie. He described the man as white and 5’10.” He was wearing a black jacket and blue jeans. When the officer spoke to him, the man said that he was Russian. Kovacic arrested the accused for robbery. When he was informed of his right to counsel, the accused wanted to talk to a Russian-speaking lawyer.

[30] After the accused was placed inside the police vehicle and before the second suspect was apprehended, the accused told Kovacic that he had been out drinking that night with his friend Illia and they were living together in apartment six at 121 Fourth Street in Toronto. He did not know his friend’s last name.

[31] The accused was transported to the police station, paraded before the staff sergeant and placed in an interview room. Kovacic testified that at 3:08 a.m., a Russian-speaking lawyer called the station and the accused was handed the telephone.

[32] In cross-examination, Kovacic testified that the accused appeared to understand English and he did not notice an odour of alcohol on his breath.

Police Officer Adrian Dyke

[33] Police Officer Adrian Dyke was with Kovacic when they arrived at 54 Murrie. As a result of the radio call, he was aware that on Lake Shore, the victim had picked up two men of Eastern European descent, possibly Polish or Russian, and they held a knife to his face and robbed him. At the scene, Gaal told Dyke that the men ran along Murrie and south on Dwight. One of the men was wearing a black jacket and blue jeans.

[34] Dyke and Kovacic drove around looking for suspects matching the description and when they saw the accused in the alleyway, they called him over. He said something with a European accent and they arrested him for robbery. A pat down search produced car keys, assorted coins and a Manitoba driver’s licence.

[35] After they placed him inside the police vehicle, the accused told them that he was at a bar with his friend, who had been walking behind him, and they lived in apartment six at 121 Fourth Street.

[36] As their police vehicle was reversing out of the alleyway, a motion sensor light came on and Dyke got out of the vehicle and waited for the canine unit to arrive.

[37] After the canine unit arrived and began to search for the second suspect, Dyke heard a sound like a bang on the west side of Second Street and he saw a truck parked close to a garage. He shone his flashlight under the truck and heard someone say, “Okay, you got me,” and a man stretched his hands out from under the truck.

[38] Dyke arrested the man who identified himself as Illia Chornei and Kovacic assisted in the arrest. During the pat down search of Chornei, Dyke found 820 Pakistani rupees. Police Officer Mark Delugt found a silver screwdriver.

[39] In cross-examination, Dyke testified that Chornei was arrested a few houses away from the place where the accused was arrested.

Police Officer Paul Passerino

[40] At the police station, Police Officer Paul Passerino took photographs of the accused and Chornei at 4:28 and 4:29 a.m. on March 20, 2012. In the photographs, the accused is sleeping on a bench and using a black leather jacket as a pillow. Chornei is wearing a brown leather jacket.

[41] In cross-examination, Passerino testified that when he arrived at 54 Murrie, Gaal was visibly upset. He told Passerino that the man sitting in the rear passenger seat reached out and held a knife to his throat. He threatened to kill Gaal and demanded his wallet. Gaal handed him all of his money. Then the man in the rear driver’s seat took hold of him and the man in the rear passenger seat got out and kicked Gaal in the side of his face. They took his car keys and ran along Murrie.

[42] Passerino’s notes state that there was a white male with a black jacket sitting in the rear driver’s seat and another white male with short brown hair. He agreed that his notes read: “Suspect held knife to his throat. Then suspect in rear passenger seat held a knife to his throat, knife small, suspect with knife out and walks around and kicks cabbie in face.” Passerino clarified that it was his understanding that Gaal believed that the man sitting in the rear passenger seat was the one holding the knife to his throat.

Police Officer Joanne Venn

[43] Police Officer Joanne Venn of the Canine Unit received a radio call to attend the alleyway where the accused was arrested. At 1:22 a.m., she spoke with Dyke who told her that two men had robbed a taxi driver at knifepoint and one was in custody. Dyke told her that he believed the other suspect was in the area.

[44] At 1:35 a.m. Venn commenced a search with her canine partner who picked up a human scent and began to pull in the direction of 121 Second Street. As Venn entered the driveway, she heard a male voice say, “Okay, I’m here, I give up.” She could see his head under a truck and told him to crawl out.

[45] At 1:50 a.m., Venn began to search garbage bins in the area and at 2:15 a.m. she found car keys inside a green compost pail in front of 70 Heman Street. Police Officer David Purvis took photographs of the keys.

Police Officer Norman Dewling

[46] Staff Sergeant Norman Dewling testified that during the booking procedure, the accused answered his questions and responded appropriately. He did not smell any alcohol on the man.

Police Officer Darren Alldrit

[47] Police Officer Darren Alldrit was working in 52 Division on March 19, 2012. At 10:00 p.m., he received information over the radio about a robbery of a Kingsboro taxi driver involving two men, possibly Polish, who held a sharp object to the victim’s neck and demanded his cash, keys and cell phone. At 11:54 p.m., the officer took a video-taped statement from Mohy-ud-din.

[48] At 1:00 a.m. on March 20, 2012, Alldrit received information from an officer at 22 Division about a robbery of a Kingboro taxi driver involving two men. Alldrit noted similarities between the two robberies.

[49] At 2:54 a.m., he arrived at the 22 Division Criminal Investigation Bureau and spoke with the officer-in-charge, Stephen Laramy. At 4:56 a.m., Alldrit and Police Officer Brian Riggs entered the interview room, identified themselves and explained the charges.

[50] Alldrit asked the accused if he had spoken with a lawyer and he said no. He did not want to provide a statement to the police. Alldrit testified that the accused appeared to understand English and did not ask for an interpreter. He said that it is possible that the accused may have been drinking, but there was nothing significant enough to make a note of it.

[51] In cross-examination, Alldrit testified that when he left the interview room at 5:02 a.m., he took steps to confirm that the accused had already talked to a Russian-speaking lawyer.

Police Officer Brian Riggs

[52] Police Officer Brian Riggs testified that before he left the interview room, he showed the accused a photograph of a man in the rear passenger seat of a taxi captured on March 19, 2012 at 10.42.05 p.m. and said, “Who is that?” The accused replied, “That’s me,” and he put his signature on the photograph.

Police Officer Steven Head

[53] Police Officer Stephen Head is a member of the 52 Division Forensic Identification Services Unit. On March 20, 2012, he examined a vehicle registered to Kingsboro Taxi with licence plate number BKSW 124 and downloaded images from the onboard CCTV system captured on March 19, 2012 between 10:28 p.m. and 10:44 p.m.

Police Officer Paul Soucy

[54] On March 20, 2012, Police Officer Paul Soucy, a member of the 22 Division Forensic Identification Services Unit, examined a vehicle registered to Kingsboro Taxi with licence plate number BKFX 426. The officer downloaded images from the onboard CCTV system.

[55] Soucy explained that the CCTV system is triggered when a door is opened and operates whenever there is motion inside the taxi. The camera moves back and forth quickly, capturing images from the driver’s side and passenger side. Soucy testified that if a taxi driver were kicked by someone standing outside the driver’s door, the camera would likely not be able to pick up the image. He agreed that the camera has infrared lighting that picks up details from inside a dark taxi which may cause clothing fabric to appear lighter than it is.

[56] Soucy lifted fingerprints from the vehicle he examined. On March 21, 2012, he received information from Bev Starrett, a technician who searched the Automated Fingerprint Identification System (AFIS), which is a storage and retrieval system of fingerprints and palm prints. Starrett advised Soucy that she found a possible match with the palm print lifted from the vehicle.

[57] Soucy conducted a ridge by ridge analysis of the palm print lifted from the top right corner of the driver’s window and the left palm print of the accused obtained after his arrest. Soucy verified that the palm print on the driver’s window belonged to the accused and was likely deposited on the window either by pushing the driver’s door or by leaning on it.

Christianne Lys

[58] Christianne Lys is a civilian member of the Toronto Police Service and a fingerprint examiner in the Forensic Identification Services Unit. She testified as an expert in the analysis, comparison, evaluation and verification of fingerprints. In 2015, she was asked to search the AFIS database and compare the palm print taken from the driver’s window with the accused’s left palm print. It was her opinion that the palm prints contained the same configuration of ridge characteristics.

Police Officer Stephen Laramy

[59] Police Officer Stephen Laramy is the officer in charge of the case. He explained that initially, there were two separate investigations because the robbery on March 19, 2012 occurred in 52 Division and the robbery on March 20, 2012 occurred in 22 Division.

[60] He testified that with respect to the robbery on March 19, 2012, Head took fifty-four photographs of the taxi with licence plate number BKSW 124, as well as its onboard camera and fingerprints found on the driver’s door. Head also downloaded two hundred and ten images from the onboard CCTV system.

[61] With respect to the robbery on March 20, 2012, Soucy, Passerino and Purvis took a total of seventy-six photographs of the seized property, including the taxi with licence plate number BKFX 426, the accused and Chornei. Soucy also downloaded three hundred and eighty-nine images from the onboard CCTV system.

Police Officer Susanne Morgan

[62] Police Officer Susanne Morgan was called by the defence. She received a radio call at 10:49 p.m. on March 19, 2012 about a robbery at Bremner and Simcoe Streets. After speaking with Mohy-ud-din, she went to the Renaissance Downtown Toronto Hotel and the Rogers Centre, asking for surveillance videos to be made available to the police. She did not follow up personally to determine whether any videos were given to the police.

Police Officer Steven Laramy

[63] Police Officer Laramy was called by the defence. He testified that with respect to the robbery on March 19, 2012, a follow up was conducted with the Renaissance Downtown Toronto Hotel and it was determined that there were no video cameras located outside the hotel. He was unaware whether there was any video surveillance captured by cameras at the Rogers Centre. He testified that because the onboard cameras in the taxis yielded excellent photographic images of the two men, he made the decision that there was no need to develop a further profile of the suspects.

The Positions of the Parties

[64] The Crown submits that there is overwhelming evidence that the accused participated in both robberies. The Crown relies on the evidence of the taxi drivers, which has been consistent throughout; the onboard camera images; the palm print on the driver’s door of the taxi operated by Gaal; the accused’s statement to the police that he had been drinking with Chornei that night and Chornei was walking behind him; and the photograph that the accused signed identifying himself in the rear passenger seat of the taxi operated by Mohy-ud-din.

[65] The position of the defence is that Mohy-ud-din and Gaal were not able to see who took the money or the items from them and, therefore, they cannot say whether the accused was present during the robberies. It is submitted that Passerino was the first officer to arrive on scene after the Gaal robbery and he recorded in his notes that the man in the rear driver’s seat held a knife to his throat and was wearing a black jacket. It is asserted that both men were wearing dark jackets and reliance cannot be placed on the camera images because the infrared lighting distorts the colour of the fabric and makes it appear lighter.

[66] The defence asserts that the accused was not present during the robbery of Gaal. It is asserted that Gaal did not tell the 911 operator that he was kicked in the face and the only reason that he identified the accused as the person who kicked him is because the police told him about the fingerprint on the door. Moreover, there is no camera image of the accused kicking Gaal in the face.

[67] The defence also asserts that there was no expert evidence called to explain how the cameras captured the images inside the taxis. Further, the police did not follow up to obtain videos from the Mohy-ud-din robbery to corroborate when the accused left the vehicle, and there is no clear photographic image of the screwdriver or the knife or any visible injuries to the victims.

[68] The defence contends that it was improper for Crown counsel to show the CCTV images to Mohy-ud-din and Gaal before asking them to identify the accused as one of the robbers. The defence also claims that the Crown has not produced all available images captured by the CCTV cameras.

[69] It is the position of the defence, therefore, that even if the accused was present in the taxis, the Crown has not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew what was happening or that he participated in the robberies.

Analysis

[70] Mohy-ud-din testified that at 10:25 p.m. on March 19, 2012, two men flagged him down on Lake Shore near Fourth in Toronto. They were speaking together in a language that Mohy-ud-din did not understand. The man in the rear driver’s seat directed Mohy-ud-din to drive them to the CN Tower and to stop in front of the Downtown Toronto Renaissance Hotel.

[71] The man reached around and placed Mohy-ud-din in a hold while pressing a small screwdriver against his neck. Mohy-ud-din saw the steel part of the screwdriver in his rear view mirror. The man demanded money and Mohy-ud-din passed back $135. Mohy-ud-din testified that the accused took the money. The man in the rear driver’s seat then demanded his wallet, cell phone and car keys and Mohy-ud-din complied. He testified that the accused took hold of the Pakistani rupees and the cell phone and car keys before they fled on foot. He drove his taxi to Bremner where he observed the men walking and called the police.

[72] Mohy-ud-din gave his evidence in a forthright and honest manner and his evidence about what happened has remained consistent. I accept his evidence that it was the accused who took his money and other items because the man in the rear driver’s seat was using both hands to keep Mohy-ud-din in a neck hold with a screwdriver pressed against his neck. When they left, the man took money from the accused. I find that the two men left together. The onboard camera images show a man in the rear driver’s seat and the accused in the rear passenger seat between 10:28 p.m. and 10:44:15 p.m. Five seconds later, there is no one in the rear passenger or rear driver’s seats.

[73] Mohy-ud-din testified that he saw the faces of both men and he identified the accused at trial. Further, the accused confirmed with Riggs that he was the person seated in the rear passenger seat on March 19, 2012 at 10:42 p.m. and he signed the photographic image captured by the onboard camera.

[74] Gaal testified that shortly before midnight on March 19, 2012, two men flagged him down on Lake Shore near Islington. The man in the rear passenger seat directed him to drive to Oakville, turn around and return to Islington where he was told to stop his taxi in front of 54 Murrie.

[75] As he turned around to tell them the cost of the fare, he saw a knife in the accused’s hand. The accused put him in a headlock and held the knife against his throat. He threatened to kill Gaal and demanded money. Gaal passed back his money. A demand was made for his wallet, but he said that he did not carry one.

[76] The accused got out of the taxi and the man in the rear driver’s seat put his arms around Gaal’s neck. The accused opened the front driver’s door and demanded Gaal’s wallet, striking him in the face. I accept the evidence of Soucy and Lys that the left palm print on the driver’s door of the taxi belonged to the accused. I conclude that the reason the accused got out of the taxi, opened the driver’s door and struck Gaal was because he wanted more money.

[77] The man in the rear driver’s seat demanded Gaal’s car keys and he complied. The men left on foot and Gaal ran in the opposite direction. When he returned to his taxi, he located his cell phone and called the police.

[78] Gaal testified in a forthright and credible manner. It was obvious from the 911 call that during these events, he feared for his life. He told the operator that he was robbed by two men and the man wearing the black jacket held a knife to his head.

[79] I accept the evidence of Laramy that all of the images that were downloaded from the onboard CCTV cameras were disclosed to the defence. Soucy testified that the CCTV system operates when there is movement inside the vehicle and the camera would not likely capture an image of someone outside the driver’s door.

[80] Even though the colour of some of the clothing inside the dark taxi vehicles appears to be lighter than the colour of the jackets in the police photographs taken at the station after the arrests, I accept Gaal’s evidence that the accused was the person wearing the black jacket at the time of the robbery. I find that Passerino was mistaken when he recorded in his notes that the victim told him that the man wearing the black jacket was seated in the rear driver’s seat.

[81] The defence takes issue with Crown counsel preparing their witnesses for trial by showing the taxi drivers photographic images captured by the CCTV cameras inside their vehicles. There was nothing improper about this, and I am satisfied that they were not influenced in their identification of the accused as the person who committed the robberies. Their evidence was logical, consistent and corroborated by other evidence.

[82] The accused told Kovacic that he had been drinking with Illia that night, they were living together, and his friend was walking behind him. Chornei was arrested a few houses away from the place where the accused was arrested. A search of Chornei at the scene produced a screwdriver and Pakistani rupees.

[83] From my observation, there is an unmistakeable resemblance between the appearance of the person on the CCTV images and the appearance of the accused in court. The CCTV images thus support the testimony of both Gaal and Mohy-ud-din with respect to identity. As the Supreme Court of Canada held in R. v. Nikolovski, [1996] 3 S.C.R. 1197, such photographic evidence can be particularly useful for the trier of fact to consider when determining the issue of identity as, unlike human witnesses, “[t]he video camera… is never subject to stress. Through tumultuous events it continues to record accurately and dispassionately all that comes before it”: Nikolovski, at para. 21. While the CCTV images are not perfect, particularly with respect to the previously discussed colour distortions, I find them to be of sufficient quality, clarity, and number to serve as convincing evidence of identity.

Disposition

[84] Accordingly, I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty as a party to the robbery of Usman Mohy-ud-din. He knew that Chornei intended to rob Mohy-ud-din and was present and helped him commit the robbery.

[85] I am also satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty as a party to the robbery of Ahmed Gaal. He knew that Chornei intended to rob Gaal and was present and helped him commit the robbery.

DUNNET J.

Released: June 5, 2015

CITATION: R. v. Ievgen Tereshchuk, 2015 ONSC 3355 COURT FILE NO.: 13-50000 522 DATE: 20150605

ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN

– and –

IEVGEN TERESHCHUK

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

DUNNET J.

Released: June 5, 2015