Court File and Parties

Court File No.: CR-24-0267-00 / CR-25-0206-00 Date: 2025-09-10

ONTARIO

SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE

B E T W E E N:

His Majesty the King

K. Young, for the Crown

- and -

Samuel Beaulieu

S. Rehman, for the Accused

HEARD: September 5, 2025 at Thunder Bay, Ontario

Mr. Justice W.D. Newton

Reasons on Application for Adjournment

[1] The accused, Mr. Beaulieu, is charged with sexual assault contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code. He seeks to adjourn his trial which is set for September 8-10, 2025.

[2] The Crown and the Court are ready to proceed.

[3] The adjournment is sought because counsel for the accused seeks to explore "prior relationship evidence" which may trigger a s. 276 application. Counsel for the accused alleges that this involves a thorough review of the accused's cellphone, texts, and social media accounts. Counsel also alleges the possibility of collusion between complainants (there are other similar charges involving other complainants) and states that records of a sexual abuse center and the complainant's school records "may bear on credibility, motive, and reliability."

[4] To put this adjournment request in context, I note the following:

a) this charge was laid in May 2023;

b) at the first judicial pre-trial in this court on January 17, 2025, it was noted that there would be third party record (s. 278.3) applications;

c) at the continuation of the pre-trial on February 13, 2025, it was noted that the accused would be bringing s. 278 applications regarding the records of the Sexual Abuse Centre and the complainant's texts to third parties;

d) on April 28, 2025, the trial was set to commence September 8, 2025 and a stage 1 s. 278.3 application was set for June 30, 2025 and stage 2 for July 31, 2025;

e) on June 30, 2025, counsel for the accused advised that he was not prepared to proceed with the s. 278 application but would be by July 31, 2025;

f) On July 31, 2025, the accused had brought a s. 278 application for counselling records from the complainant's school but had not served the record holder, and the stage 1 application was adjourned to August 18, 2025;

g) On August 18, 2025, counsel for the accused advised that the s. 278 application for school records was abandoned;

h) On August 27, 2025, this application was brought in Trial Confirmation Court and was directed to me as trial judge.

[5] If the adjournment request is granted, the accused concedes that all delay to the new trial date is defence delay and expressly waives s. 11(b) of the Charter.

[6] In opposing the request for an adjournment, the Crown notes that accused's cell phone (which was seized pursuant to warrant) contains nothing relevant to s. 276 and that any third-party record application is speculative and would fail at stage 1. The Crown notes that these applications could have been brought within the dates previously set by the Court and that counsel could have reviewed the cell phone in the accused's possession at least four months ago when the trial date was set. The Crown asserts that an adjournment will cause additional stress to the complainant.

[7] Counsel for the accused candidly stated that these circumstances could support an appeal based on ineffective assistance on counsel if the accused is forced to proceed to trial without a full exploration of these possible applications, and that Mr. Beaulieu's right to a fair trial requires that these potential s. 276 and s. 278 issues be explored.

[8] Conduct of counsel to date has resulted in unnecessary delay, the waste of scant judicial resources (at least three appearances before me), scant Crown resources, the loss of trial dates which are unlikely to be used at this late date, and increased anxiety for both the complainant and the accused as the trial is delayed.

[9] As noted in Criminal Pleadings and Practice in Canada, an adjournment can even be granted to "allow indolent counsel to prepare a defence when counsel has not prepared a defence on behalf of his client before the scheduled trial date."

[10] After announcing my intention to grant the adjournment on September 5, 2025, Crown counsel sought an order to unseal the warrant packages that granted three search warrants against the accused. The affidavit in support of the application to unseal asserts that the accused may be entitled to the disclosure of the warrant application. This development provides some "after the fact" support for granting the adjournment.

[11] The trial is adjourned. This matter will go to assignment court on September 29, 2025, to set new dates for application(s) and a judge alone trial. I am not seized. Delay to next trial date is attributable to defence.

The Hon. Mr. Justice W.D. Newton

Released: September 10, 2025