Her Majesty the Queen v. Bekah Willbanks
COURT FILE NO.: CR-21-012
DATE: 2022-08-05
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
– and –
BEKAH WILLBANKS
COUNSEL:
L. Fritzley, for the Crown
A.M. Stewart, for Ms. Willbanks
HEARD: June 13, 14 and 16, 2022
THE HONOURABLE JUSTICE I.R. SMITH
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT[^1]
Introduction
[1] The Crown alleges that the accused Bekah Willbanks committed the offences of sexual assault, sexual interference, and assault against KB, a 14-year-old boy at the relevant times, and the offences of sexual assault and sexual interference against KB’s sister, EB, when EB was 12 years old. Ms. Willbanks has entered pleas of not guilty to each of these offences.
[2] The relevant events occurred in the last half of 2019 and the early part of 2020 when Ms. Willbanks and AM, the mother of KB and EB, were both residents of a women’s shelter in Simcoe. Ms. Willbanks resided there with her son, then a toddler aged 2 or 3, and AM lived in the shelter with her children, KB and EB.
[3] The main allegation in this matter is that during this period, Ms. Willbanks, who was 25 years old, had a sexual relationship with KB, during which they had sexual intercourse repeatedly. Since KB was legally unable to consent to sex with Ms. Willbanks by virtue of his age (Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 150.1), any sexual touching by Ms. Willbanks of KB would constitute the offence of sexual assault, contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code. It would also constitute the offence of sexual interference, contrary to s. 151 of the Code.
[4] The allegation of simple assault relates to a single incident in which KB says Ms. Willbanks punched him in the chest during a disagreement about some marijuana that had gone missing.
[5] The allegations involving EB relate to a single incident on New Year’s Eve at the end of 2019 and beginning of 2020 when Ms. Willbanks is alleged to have touched EB, both reaching down EB’s pants and putting her hand on EB’s breasts. Like KB, EB was too young to be able to consent to sexual contact with Ms. Willbanks.
[6] The Crown called seven witnesses: KB, EB and AM, as well as four employees of the women’s shelter. Ms. Willbanks did not testify and called no other evidence.
Amendment to the Indictment
[7] The indictment alleges that the offences against KB occurred between November 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020. The Crown applies to amend the indictment to conform to the evidence given by KB, who testified that his sexual relationship with Ms. Willbanks began in September 2019, not November. Accordingly, the Crown asks that each of counts 1, 2 and 3 be amended so that it is alleged that the offences against KB occurred between September 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020.
[8] Counsel for Ms. Willbanks objects to the amendment alleging that her preparation for trial may have been different had she known of the proposed change in date range.
[9] I note that the Crown’s application was made at the close of the Crown’s case, but that counsel for Ms. Willbanks was made aware of the Crown’s intention to make the application before KB was cross-examined. KB was the first witness in this trial.
[10] In my view, the proposed amendment causes the accused no prejudice. In this respect, I note that there is no evidence that the defence has been misled in any way; that the time of the offence is not an essential element of the offences alleged; and that the time of the offence is not crucial to the defence advanced in this matter, which is simply that the Crown has not proved its case given the alleged unreliability of the Crown’s witnesses (see: Regina v. B.G., 1990 CanLII 7308 (SCC), [1990] 2 S.C.R. 30, paras. 20 – 44; Criminal Code, s. 601(4.1)).
[11] Accordingly, the indictment will be amended by replacing the word “November” in each of counts 1, 2 and 3, with the word “September.”
[12] I add that although I think the Crown’s request for an amendment was proper given KB’s testimony, as will be seen below, I am of the view that the events described by KB in this case probably occurred in November and December of 2019.
The Evidence
[13] AM and her two children moved into a women’s shelter in 2019, shortly after the passing of AM’s father, with whom they had been living in Brantford. I have heard evidence that the passing of AM’s father had a devastating impact on the family, and that there were other issues in their lives that were having a deep emotional impact on AM, KB and EB. Those other issues included the fact that AM’s mother was seriously ill, and has since died, but whatever other problems the family were having were not specified in the evidence. In any case, AM testified that she was at the shelter for a period of time until she could get back on her feet.
[14] Shortly after AM and her children arrived at the shelter, they met Ms. Willbanks. KB and EB were introduced to Ms. Willbanks by AM, who told Ms. Willbanks that her children were 14 and 12 respectively. Ms. Willbanks was 25 at this time.
[15] The evidence of the witnesses, including KB, EB and AM, as well as four staff members from the shelter, was that there were various rules in place governing life at the shelter. Key among those rules was that residents were not supposed to be in each other’s rooms, especially not with the door closed, and that those residents who had children under the age of 16 with them had to arrange for another resident to watch their children if they went out of the shelter and left the children behind.
[16] As part of her effort to recover after the death of her father, AM took on jobs to earn an income. She worked first at Tim Horton’s and later as a dispatcher for a local taxi company. She worked long and irregular hours, especially in the latter position, and routinely needed to have KB and EB watched by someone else. After consulting with staff at the shelter, AM decided to ask Ms. Willbanks to be her “child watch.” It was thought that she would be a good fit because she appeared to be a responsible mother herself, already caring for her toddler. Ms. Willbanks agreed to take on this role. Each time AM left the shelter and left her children in Ms. Willbanks’ care, a form was filled out and provided to shelter staff (although I note that none of these forms is in evidence).
[17] At first, the arrangement with Ms. Willbanks worked well. EB was fond of Ms. Willbanks and enjoyed helping to care for her small son. KB was less interested in Ms. Willbanks, and was more difficult to care for, but the arrangement worked for him as well. KB and EB spent a lot of time with Ms. Willbanks and her son.
[18] Eventually, though, the relationships began to change. EB testified that she began to feel that Ms. Willbanks was less interested in her and more interested in her brother. They seemed to be together frequently, often standing or sitting quite close to each other. They “would act sneaky” and sometimes when she happened upon them, it would seem that they would move quickly apart from each other. EB started to feel excluded and unwelcome. Although she never saw Ms. Willbanks and KB touching sexually in any way, she started to suspect that they were in a relationship. At one point, she raised her concerns with AM, who responded that there was no proof and that they could not act on suspicion alone.
[19] KB testified that after he met Ms. Willbanks in the summer of 2019, he formed the view that she was nice. Often when he was in her care when AM was at work, KB would ask if he could leave and go hang out with his friends. After checking with AM and the shelter, Ms. Willbanks would give him permission to go.
[20] One evening after school had started in September 2019, however, things changed. KB was in Ms. Willbanks’ care and he and Ms. Willbanks were watching the television show Jersey Shore in a main floor common room at the shelter. A staff member named Cindy came in and told them it was 11 o’clock and time to go to bed. KB asked if they could continue to watch the show upstairs in a room called the “quiet room.” Cindy agreed. Once upstairs, KB and Ms. Willbanks were sitting on different couches but moved so that they were on the same couch and under a blanket together. They started kissing and eventually Ms. Willbanks got on top of KB and they had sexual intercourse. After a while, they left the quiet room and resumed having sex in Ms. Willbanks’ room.
[21] KB said that he was very surprised by this development and that it had “just kind of happened.” After the evening in the quiet room, according to KB, he and Ms. Willbanks had sex together repeatedly until Ms. Willbanks left the shelter (which was on December 31, 2019, although KB thought the date was later). KB said that they had sex in the private bathroom at the shelter which connected his bedroom to the bedroom that AM and EB shared, and in the shelter’s main bathroom for all residents, and that they routinely had sex at a local motel so that they would not get caught. KB said that he started skipping school so that he could meet Ms. Willbanks at the motel for sex. He said that they had sex together too many times to count (although he estimated 30 – 40 times in cross-examination).
[22] KB said that sometimes other people came to the motel with them, including EB, a friend of Ms. Willbanks who goes by the nickname Jeep, Ms. Willbanks’ son, and friends of KB. On some of those occasions (but not all), KB and Ms. Willbanks would secretly have sex in the bathroom while the others were present. When they went to the motel alone, they always had sex. KB summarized by saying that they had sex together whenever they wanted.
[23] On some of these occasions at the motel, there was alcohol and drugs, the former and sometimes the latter being supplied by Ms. Willbanks. Ms. Willbanks was KB’s child watch for many but not all of the times they had sex together.
[24] On one of the occasions that they had sex in the motel bathroom, Jeep started knocking on the door and was “freaking out” because he thought they were having sex, which they each denied. In fact, KB testified that he repeatedly denied that he was having sex with Ms. Willbanks when confronted by those with suspicions (including his mother) because, as he put it, he was having the time of his life and did not want it to stop.
[25] It is apparent that several people were suspicious about the relationship between Ms. Willbanks and KB. One shelter worker, Jolene Miklavcic, testified that staff had suspicions and that she found Ms. Willbanks and KB alone in the pantry once, but saw no touching. On another occasion, on December 31, 2019, she saw them on the shelter’s surveillance monitor go into Ms Willbanks’ room together and close the door. She went upstairs and told them that was not allowed and that the door had to be kept open. Thereafter, she could see KB standing in the doorway with the door open.
[26] Kim Hitchon testified that once in November or December 2019, she heard an unusual amount of noise coming from the quiet room. It was after midnight. She went upstairs to the quiet room and found Ms. Willbanks and KB alone. She told them to keep quiet.
[27] Cindy Roberts testified that once in late November 2019, she found Ms. Willbanks and KB sitting on a couch together and watching TV. She told them that they were past curfew and had to go upstairs. Later that evening she was surprised to find them together alone in the quiet room. They were sitting together on a small couch.
[28] Gwen Henrich testified that she was told that Ms. Willbanks and KB had been found together alone in a room. On her next shift, on December 21, 2019, she made sure to watch the surveillance monitor carefully. On that same shift, she got a telephone call from AM who asked that Ms. Henrich pass on a message to Ms. Willbanks. Ms. Henrich went upstairs to find Ms. Willbanks. She went to Ms. Willbanks’ door where she knocked and got no answer. She could hear Ms. Willbanks’ son crying inside so she opened the door and found him unattended. She then knocked on KB’s door, but got no answer, so she went back downstairs to see if either of them had signed out of the shelter. Since they had not, she went back upstairs and knocked again on KB’s door. There was no answer. Eventually, Ms. Henrich announced that she was coming in. At that point, KB opened the door and she saw KB, Ms. Willbanks, and her son together in KB’s room. They seemed startled and Ms. Henrich simply passed on AM’s message. Later, when Ms. Willbanks came downstairs, she told her that she was not to be alone in a room with KB.
[29] Ms. Henrich reviewed the surveillance video afterward. She was able to see that Ms. Willbanks and KB were alone together in the room for 30 minutes, she could see herself going upstairs, knocking on doors and coming back down to the office. She saw that when she came back downstairs, Ms. Willbanks left KB’s room, went to her own room and retrieved her son, and then returned to KB’s room before Ms. Henrich came back upstairs.
[30] Shelter staff later had AM watch this video from the shelter’s surveillance cameras. AM testified that it showed that Ms. Willbanks and KB had spent 20 to 40 minutes together in KB’s room with the door closed while staff members knocked at the door and Ms. Willbanks’ toddler was left alone crying in her room. AM said that when the video showed Ms. Willbanks leaving the room, she was carrying her sweater that she had been wearing when she went in. Ms. Hitchon testified that when Ms. Willbanks emerged from the room her hair was wet and she had changed her clothes.
[31] Although AM testified that after watching the video she was convinced that KB and Ms. Willbanks were having sex, she chose to “cover for them” and claimed that she had asked Ms. Willbanks to fold laundry for her in her room, which, as I have said, connected to KB’s room via their shared bathroom. Thereafter, however, she took steps to limit the time that KB spent with Ms. Willbanks by getting KB to come to work with her, but sometimes she had no choice but to leave them together.
[32] Ms. Henrich also testified that she found Ms. Willbanks and KB together alone in Ms. Willbanks room on December 31, 2019.
[33] KB testified that eventually his relationship with Ms. Willbanks started to sour. They began arguing. At one point she accused him of stealing some marijuana. KB denied the accusation. Ms. Willbanks started to search KB’s pockets for the marijuana and punched him in the chest. KB was upset, told Ms. Willbanks that she was “fucking crazy”, and left.
[34] KB testified that he and Ms. Willbanks were never caught having sex together but there were some close calls. In addition to Jeep at the motel, a worker at the shelter named Cindy had suspicions and another named Kelly almost caught KB hiding in Ms. Willbanks’ closet when she did a room check. KB noticed that staff appeared to be paying more attention to KB and Ms. Willbanks when they were together.
[35] On New Year’s Eve at the end of 2019, KB went out with his friends, but EB was invited to the home of Ms. Willbanks’ brother. When EB arrived at about 9 or 10 p.m., she observed that Ms. Willbanks had already been drinking. They drank some more together, and Ms. Willbanks became drunk. EB said that she remained sober, having had only a small amount to drink. Ms. Willbanks passed out in bed and EB took care of Ms. Willbanks’ son. She could not get the toddler to go to sleep so she lay down with him on the bed where Ms. Willbanks was already asleep. She said that she was “chilling” with the toddler when Ms. Willbanks woke up and started touching EB on her vagina and breasts.
[36] EB said that Ms. Willbanks first put her hand in EB’s pants underneath her underwear and touched her vagina, although she did not get very far before EB told her to stop and removed her hand. Then Ms. Willbanks put her hand on EB’s breasts underneath her bra. EB told her to stop and moved her hand. She said that she would tell Ms. Willbanks’ brother what she had done. Ms. Willbanks replied that if she did EB would not be allowed to return to the house. Ms. Willbanks then rolled over and went back to sleep. EB tried to discuss the incident with Ms. Willbanks the following morning, but Ms. Willbanks “didn’t say much”.
[37] Eventually, at some point after they left the shelter, KB admitted to his mother that he had been having sex with Ms. Willbanks. AM alerted the shelter staff and they called the police.
The Credibility and Reliability of the Witnesses
[38] The essence of Ms. Willbanks’ position is that the Crown has not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt because the witnesses were not credible and/or reliable.
The evidence of staff at the women’s shelter
[39] I am satisfied that the four shelter workers who testified before me were both credible and provided reliable evidence. While unsupported by documentary evidence, or the actual video from the surveillance cameras at the shelter, I accept their evidence of their observations of Ms. Willbanks and KB. While none of these four witnesses saw any sexual contact between them, they did observe Ms. Willbanks and KB alone together when KB was under Ms. Willbanks’ care and at times and in circumstances which were contrary to house rules and suggestive of the conclusion that they wanted to be alone undetected. The workers’ description of the video footage was corroborated by AM and vice versa.
The evidence of AM
[40] AM was not a careful or precise witness, and her answers were occasionally difficult to follow, but I accept that she was being truthful about an emotional topic. To be sure, she is angry about what she believes happened between Ms. Willbanks and her son, and for that reason it is prudent to treat her evidence with some caution. But the fact of the matter is that little of AM’s evidence is especially significant. Its most important feature is corroborated by the shelter staff members with whom she watched the video surveillance recording.
[41] AM did testify that she lied to staff of the shelter after watching the video, saying that she had asked Ms. Willbanks to go into her room, but I accept her explanation that while she found the video compelling, she neither wanted to alienate KB nor to lose Ms. Willbanks as a person who could watch her children. She was at the time without any other support, was dealing both with the recent death of her father and with her mother who was dying while waiting for a lung transplant. She had nowhere else to take her children and needed her job to earn money for her kids. She needed to be able to use Ms. Willbanks as a child watch. It was a difficult situation. I accept this explanation for her lie to shelter staff.
The evidence of KB
[42] KB was a candid and open witness. He readily acknowledged, as I have said, that he enjoyed his sexual relationship with Ms. Willbanks and was fond of her. He therefore did his best to keep it secret, lying any time someone suggested that it existed. He did not want it to come to an end. Nothing about that evidence strikes me as incredible or unlikely. I accept KB’s explanation for his lies about the existence of the relationship.
[43] That is not to say that KB’s evidence is free of problems. He was confronted with several inconsistencies in prior statements and claimed to have a poor memory about some events while maintaining the core of his evidence, i.e., that he had an ongoing sexual relationship with Ms. Willbanks.
[44] Counsel for Ms. Willbanks raised a number of issues which, so she argued, cast doubt on KB’s credibility and reliability. It is true that he was not an especially careful witness respecting details and may have forgotten or misremembered some of those details, especially about the timing or order of events, but I am satisfied that the core of KB’s evidence is trustworthy: he had sex more than once with Ms. Willbanks and did his best to hide it from friends, family and the shelter.
[45] KB and EB were children at the time of relevant events and remained children at the time of the trial. As directed by the Supreme Court of Canada, I have weighed their evidence keeping those facts in mind (see B.G., supra, at pp. 54-55 and Regina v. R.W. (1992), 1992 CanLII 56 (SCC), 74 C.C.C. (3d) 134 (S.C.C.), at paras. 24 – 26). As Justice Wilson wrote in B.G., “a flaw, such as a contradiction, in a child’s testimony should not be given the same effect as a similar flaw in the testimony of an adult. […] While children may not be able to recount precise details and communicate the when and where of an event with exactitude, this does not mean that they have misconceived what happened to them and who did it.”
[46] In any case, I note that KB’s evidence respecting the secretive nature of their relationship is corroborated by the evidence of each of the other witnesses who, while never actually seeing any sexual contact between the two, testified about the reasons for their suspicions that the pair were engaged in a sexual relationship. That is, Ms. Willbanks and KB were acting secretively and were seen alone together in unusual circumstances on several occasions, including on video surveillance.
[47] There are two issues, however, on which I do not fully accept the evidence of KB. The first is that I am concerned that his estimate of the number of times he had sex with Ms. Willbanks, and his evidence about the duration of the sexual relationship, are not reliable.
[48] KB first told police that he had had sex with Ms. Willbanks “a couple of times.” I accept KB’s explanation that this statement was affected by the fact that others, including his mother, were present when he made this statement, and that he was less inhibited when he gave his second statement to Det. Cst. Butler, feeling freer to be truthful and to say that he had had sex with Ms. Willbanks on multiple occasions.
[49] But KB’s evidence about the date of the beginning of the relationship and especially about the date of its end do not accord with the evidence of other witnesses. While it may be the case that KB first had sex with Ms. Willbanks in September of 2019 as he testified, other witnesses said that they noticed the suspicious behaviour to which I have referred above first in November or December of that year. As for the end of the relationship, KB testified that it was over as of the date that Ms. Willbanks moved out of the shelter, which he estimated to be in April of 2020. It is clear from the evidence of others, though, that Ms. Willbanks moved out on December 31, 2019. Indeed, by February 27, 2020, KB had already given his first statement to the police.
[50] In addition, although the evidence is far from clear on this point, it may be that KB had fewer visits to the motel on weekends than he reported. He often went out of town to visit his father on weekends and EB reported seeing KB at the motel on a weekend only once.
[51] For these reasons, while I accept KB’s evidence that he had sex with Ms. Willbanks more than “a couple of times,” I am of the view that the number of times was less than the 30 or 40 he estimated in his testimony.
[52] The second part of KB’s evidence which I cannot accept with confidence is his evidence respecting the incident when he says he was punched by Ms. Willbanks. Although I am inclined to believe that such an event occurred, KB’s description of it is vague and confused. In cross-examination he was confronted with a prior statement in which he said he was punched at a different location. While KB testified that there were two separate punching incidents, that was not previously reported to the police. I cannot accept this evidence beyond a reasonable doubt and Ms. Willbanks will therefore be acquitted of count 3 in the indictment.
[53] In my view, any other inconsistencies with KB’s prior statements or with the evidence of others were insignificant, and do not touch on the core of his evidence about his relationship with Ms. Willbanks. Counsel points out that KB also admitted to lies apart from those relating to denying the relationship, to being a “pothead” at the relevant times, and to having been in a difficult emotional state at those times. It is true that KB acknowledged lying about issues other than hiding his relationship with Ms. Willbanks, but those lies (e.g., lying about how he got alcohol the first time he drank) do not touch on the core issues in this case and do not cause me to doubt KB’s credibility at large or on the central issue. Nor, as I have already said, am I concerned by his inability to remember precise details.
[54] For all these reasons, I accept KB’s evidence that, in the latter part of 2019, he had sex with Ms. Willbanks on multiple occasions, sometimes when she was his child watch and sometimes when she was not, sometimes at the shelter, and sometimes at the motel. Indeed, as Ms. Fritzley argued, KB was not seriously challenged on the assertion that he had an ongoing sexual relationship with Ms. Willbanks.
The evidence of EB
[55] EB testified by video-link with a support person present (see, Criminal Code, s. 486.2). She was 14 at the time of trial. Although her evidence was for the most part straightforward, there are three issues with it which require some consideration.
[56] First, EB was unable to describe with precision what she said was “sneaky” about the way Ms. Willbanks and KB interacted with each other (at one point simply not answering Ms. Stewart’s question) and could not explain why she had not previously reported that she saw KB touch Ms. Willbanks’ breast once at the motel (at which point in her cross-examination she asked for a break). I am inclined to the view that these flaws in EB’s testimony are simply the product of her youth, not of any dishonesty. Her evidence that Ms. Willbanks and KB acted furtively, even if not well-explained, is corroborated by the evidence of the staff at the shelter, but I place no weight on her evidence that she saw KB touch Ms. Willbanks’ breast.
[57] Second, EB’s revelation that she was touched by Ms. Willbanks was made only after KB’s relationship with Ms. Willbanks had become known to EB. She said that she had discussed that matter with KB and with AM but had not gone into detail about it. AM testified that she had not discussed KB’s relationship with Ms. Willbanks in any depth with EB. KB said that he had not discussed the details with EB, although they had spoken generally about it.
[58] Counsel for Ms. Willbanks takes the view that the timing of EB’s allegation and the discussions I have described are suggestive of collusion and that I should therefore reject the evidence of both KB and EB. While I agree that there was an opportunity for collusion, I accept that the witnesses did not share details with each other and that their evidence is not otherwise tainted by their discussions with each other. EB gave evidence about a single experience with Ms. Willbanks which was in many respects very unlike the experiences described by KB. In addition, apart from claiming to have once seen KB touch Ms. Willbanks’ breast, EB was clear that she had never witnessed KB having sex with Ms. Willbanks. In other words, apart from the identity of the alleged offender, the evidence of touching given by each of EB and KB is largely unrelated, stands independently, and relates to distinct allegations.
[59] Last, with respect to the evidence of EB, counsel for Ms. Willbanks relies heavily on the fact that EB did not at first tell the police that she too had been assaulted. She gave an interview to Det. Cst. Butler on March 3, 2020, beginning at 2:28 p.m. and ending at 2:53 p.m., during which she did not say that she had been touched by Ms. Willbanks. After the interview, EB and AM walked away from the police station. During that walk, in tears, EB told her mother that she had been touched by Ms. Willbanks and that she had not told Det. Cst. Butler about that fact. AM promptly called Det. Cst. Butler and told him that EB had more to say. They returned to the station and, beginning at 3:52 p.m., EB gave a second statement in which she made the allegations which she repeated in court.
[60] I accept EB’s evidence that she was simply scared and anxious and, as a result, failed to tell her whole story to Det. Cst. Butler, that she regretted that decision as soon as she left the station, and that she returned and completed her statement thereafter. I accept that the statement was not influenced by any intervention of her mother, AM, and that EB gave a truthful account to Det Cst. Butler, that she has repeated in court. In other words, I accept EB’s evidence that Ms. Willbanks touched her on her vagina and breasts on December 31, 2019, as EB described.
Is there a reasonable doubt?
[61] Of course, it is not enough that I accept the evidence of the Crown’s witnesses. I must consider whether, on the whole of the evidence, I accept that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. As part of that decision, I must consider whether any evidence favourable to Ms. Willbanks causes me to be left in a state of reasonable doubt (see: Regina v. W. (D.) (1991), 1991 CanLII 93 (SCC), 63 C.C.C. (3d) 397 (S.C.C.)).
[62] In this case, several items of evidence might be said to be favourable to the defence. At one point, Ms. Willbanks is said to have sent a text message denying a sexual relationship with KB. There are also KB’s repeated denials of the relationship, AM’s evidence that she told shelter staff that she had instructed Ms. Willbanks to go into her room when staff observed her in the room with KB, the possibility of collusion between EB and KB, and the possibility that AM affected EB’s statement to Det. Cst. Butler
[63] However, none of these pieces of evidence leaves me with a doubt. Ms. Willbanks’ text, assuming it is admissible, is a simple denial consistent with KB’s denials that they had a sexual relationship which they wanted to hide. Neither leaves me in a state of any doubt. I have already said that I accept AM’s explanation for her lie to shelter staff that she had asked Ms. Willbanks to go into her room. I accept that AM lied to shelter staff and do not believe that Ms. Willbanks had been asked to attend to something in AM’s room for her. Nor am I left in a state of doubt by this evidence. Finally, I have considered above whether KB and EB colluded or otherwise tainted each other’s evidence, and whether AM affected EB’s statement to Det Cst Butler. I accept the evidence of the Crown’s witnesses on these points. Nothing about that evidence leaves me in a state of doubt.
Similar Fact Evidence
[64] The Crown has asked me to consider count-to-count similar fact evidence in this case. I have determined that I do not need to decide this issue as I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the Crown has proven all the elements of counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the indictment without considering the proposed similar fact evidence. I note that the similar fact application had no bearing on count 3.
Conclusion
[65] For all these reasons, I find Ms. Willbanks guilty of counts 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the indictment.
I.R. Smith, J.
Released: August 5, 2022
COURT FILE NO.: CR-21-012
DATE: 2022-08-05
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
– and –
BEKAH WILLBANKS
REASONS FOR JUDGMENT
I.R. Smith, J.
Released: August 5, 2022
[^1]: These reasons were delivered orally on June 16, 2022.