ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HIS MAJESTY THE KING
– and –
JASON LUGA
Tracey Vogel and Arian Khader, for the Crown
Melina Macchia and Hedieh Kashani, for the Applicant
HEARD: January 20, 22, 23, 26, and 27, 2026
Rhinelander, J.
REASONS FOR DECISION
Overview:
1On May 17, 2022, Toronto Police executed a search warrant at the home of Jason Luga and located a loaded prohibited firearm with an extended magazine and a second extended magazine in his bedroom on his bed. This is not in dispute.
2Jason Luga was arrested and charged with possession of a loaded prohibited firearm (s.95(1)), possession of a prohibited firearm while knowingly not being the holder of a licence and registration certificate (s.92(1)), possession of an overcapacity cartridge magazine capable of holding 18 cartridges (s.92(2)), and possession of an overcapacity cartridge magazine capable of holding 30 cartridges (s.92(2)).
3On January 20, 2026, Mr. Luga entered pleas of not guilty to all four counts and elected to be tried without a jury.
4There is no issue that the loaded firearm and extended magazine were found on the bed in Mr. Luga’s bedroom. The issue to be determined is whether Mr. Luga knew the firearm and extended magazines were there.
5On March 16, 2026, I provided oral reasons in court with written reasons to be sent to the parties.
Facts Not in Issue:
6Officers from the Toronto Police Services executed a search warrant at the residence of Mr. Luga on May 17, 2022. The warrant authorized the search for firearms, ammunition, and any related documents.
7Police conducted surveillance of Mr. Luga on May 15, 16, and 17, 2022.
8On May 16, 2022, at approximately 2:20 a.m., Mr. Luga was observed by police to exit his home and enter the grey Chrysler with licence plate CRDJ 707. The registered owner of the vehicle was Sekou Sangare. The driver was described as male Black wearing a grey hoodie and the passenger was described as male Black wearing a black hoodie.
9The vehicle was followed to an Esso gas station on the northeast corner of Lawrence Avenue East and Leslie Street. Mr. Luga entered the kiosk and was observed purchasing various food and drink items. He was wearing ripped light-coloured jeans, a grey hoodie with red writing on it, a white t-shirt underneath, red Jordan sneakers, a belt, and a camouflage toque or beanie. Police lost sight of the vehicle after it left the Esso station and discontinued surveillance at 2:45 a.m.
10Later that same day, police set up surveillance at Mr. Luga’s home shortly before 8:00 p.m. Mr. Luga exited his home at around 8:30 p.m. and entered the passenger side of the same grey Chrysler. Mr. Luga was described as wearing a grey track suit with a black satchel and a beanie or toque on his head.
11The vehicle was followed to a nearby plaza where it parked. The driver was seen exiting the vehicle and attending at the trunk on two occasions. The driver was described as wearing a grey top and black pants.
12At approximately 10:05 p.m. the vehicle left the parking lot and was followed to a Subway restaurant on the southwest corner of Lawrence Avenue East and The Donway West. Mr. Luga exited the Subway restaurant and entered the grey Chrysler. The vehicle was followed to Mr. Luga’s residence where all three males walked up the driveway and entered the front door of the residence at 10:22 p.m. Mr. Luga was observed carrying a food bag and a black satchel.
13The surveillance team discontinued surveillance at 1:30 a.m. on May 17, 2022.
14The team set up near Mr. Luga’s residence later that day at 3:30 p.m. Mr. Luga exited his home with a small dog at 4:04 p.m. He was described as wearing a green track suit, white runners, and a grey baseball hat.
15He was arrested at 4:09 p.m. A debit card, a driver’s licence and a cell phone were found in the pockets of his clothing.
16Mr. Luga was shown a copy of the search warrant and provided police with the security code to enter his home.
17The only person located in the home was Mr. Luga’s younger sister.
18Photographs were taken by the police prior to conducting a search of the home. Items found in Mr. Luga’s bedroom on his bed included:
A Tisas, Zigana PX-9 9mm Luger calibre semi-automatic handgun with a barrel length of 102mm which is a prohibited firearm loaded with a detachable box cartridge magazine capable of holding 18 cartridges.
Additional rounds of 9mm Luger, centre fire ammunition.
A second detachable box cartridge magazine capable of holding 30 cartridges of ammunition.
19Other items found on the bed included:
A Ghost BB shotgun.
A BB handgun.
A camouflage toque/beanie.
A blue toque/beanie.
A black baseball hat.
A black bonnet.
A grey hoodie.
A bottle of Vaseline lotion.
A retainer case.
A TV remote controller.
Breath mints.
A Starbucks Frappuccino bottle.
A cell phone.
A grinder.
An empty toilet paper roll.
A flashlight.
20Mr. Luga did not have a licence, authorization, or registration certificate to possess a firearm, specifically he was not authorized to possess the Zigana PX-9 9mm Luger calibre semi-automatic handgun.
Summary of the Evidence:
Evidence of DC Da Silva Cristopulo (DC Da Silva)
21DC Da Silva has been employed with the Toronto Police Service since August 2007. He was attached to the Organized Crime Guns and Gangs Taskforce in 2022.
22He was part of a team assigned to conduct surveillance and gain further intelligence related to their investigation into Mr. Luga. On May 16, 2022, the team which included officers Blake, Stolf, and Oliver, were in plainclothes and operating unmarked police vehicles.
23Mr. Luga’s home is in the Don Mills and Lawrence Avenue area. DC Da Silva described the house as fairly large and in a multi-million-dollar neighbourhood.
24Mr. Luga was first observed at approximately 2:19 a.m. when he exited the home and entered the front passenger seat of a vehicle with licence plate CRDJ 707. The vehicle was followed to an Esso gas station at the intersection of Leslie and Lawrence Avenue East. The registered owner of the vehicle was Sekou Sangare.
25The officer was unable to confirm who was driving but provided a generic description of the driver as male Black wearing a grey hoodie. A passenger in the vehicle was described as male Black with a black hoodie.
26The officer took a photo and video of Mr. Luga outside the kiosk and inside. Mr. Luga was wearing a grey hoodie with red writing, light coloured/faded ripped jeans, a camouflage-coloured toque, red and black running shoes, and what appeared to be a studded sparkly belt. His hair was in braids about shoulder length.
27Officers reattended at Mr. Luga’s residence later that day. DC Da Silva joined the team at 9:28 p.m. and received information that Mr. Luga was inside.
28The same car from earlier that morning attended outside the residence and Mr. Luga got in. There were two other males in the car. It was followed to a Subway restaurant and back to the home. The car parked across the street from the home and all three males were seen entering the residence. Mr. Luga was carrying a bag believed to have food and a black satchel.
29At 11:50 p.m., a person was seen exiting the home, walking down the steps, and returned inside. The officer was unable to identify the person due to the distance. Surveillance was discontinued at 1:30 a.m. on May 17, 2022. No one else was seen leaving the residence while the officers were present.
30DC Da Silva had no further involvement and was not present when the search warrant was executed.
Evidence of DC Akira Danson
31DC Akira Danson has been employed with the Toronto Police Service since August 2009. He was assigned to the Gun and Gang Taskforce in 2020 and was attached to that unit on May 16, 2022.
32Police had received information Mr. Luga was in possession of a firearm. As a result, police began an investigation that included surveillance and the execution of a search warrant at Mr. Luga’s residence.
33A surveillance team attended at Mr. Luga’s residence on May 15, 2022. DC Danson did not participate in the surveillance on that date but reviewed the central notes.
34On May 16, 2022, DC Danson arrived in the area of Mr. Luga’s home around 7:48 p.m. He observed a white Volkswagen and grey Ford Escape parked in the driveway. The registered owner of the Volkswagen Jetta was Shpresa Lleshi who was born in 1964. The registered owner of the Ford Escape was Kayla Tuininga who was born in 1996. DC Danson had no further information regarding the registered owners and could provide no physical descriptions or their relationship to the occupants of the home.
35While watching the home, DC Danson saw an unknown female exit the front door of the home and access the driver’s door of the Ford Escape. The female walked to the trunk, removed items, before taking the items and going back inside the home. DC Danson is unaware who the female was.
36At 8:13 p.m., DC Danson saw a grey Chrysler 200 CRDJ 707 pull up and park in front of Mr. Luga’s home. The car pulled away and headed eastbound. No one exited or entered the car. Approximately twenty minutes later, DC Danson saw Mr. Luga exit the front door of his home, walk down the driveway, and enter the right rear passenger seat of the grey Chrysler that had returned. The vehicle left after Mr. Luga entered the back seat. Mr. Luga was described as wearing an all-grey track suit, black satchel, and a beanie on his head.
37The surveillance team followed the car to two plazas nearby and parks in front of the Subway restaurant in the plaza at 895 Lawrence Avenue East. DC Da Silva relayed information at 10:18 p.m. that Mr. Luga was seen walking up the driveway to his home with two males. He was holding a food bag and carrying a black satchel.
38Surveillance was discontinued at 1:30 a.m. on May 17, 2022.
39At 3:30 p.m. on the same day, officers set up near Mr. Luga’s home. At 4:06 p.m., DC Danson saw Mr. Luga walking down his driveway with a small dog. DC Danson described Mr. Luga as wearing a green track suit, white runners, and a grey baseball hat. In cross-examination he was shown a still image of Mr. Luga taken from his booking video and agreed the hat was a toque and not a baseball cap.
40Mr. Luga was arrested by Det. Oliver and DC Blake and placed in DC Danson’s vehicle. DC Danson believes DC Pathak was in the car with him at this time. They drove Mr. Luga back to his residence.
41Det. Stolf had received the security code from Mr. Luga and entered it, disabling the alarm and providing access to the house. DC Danson was the third officer to enter the residence. Once confirmed the house was clear, pre-search photographs were taken by Det Stolf. Mr. Luga’s sister was the only occupant found in the home. She and Mr. Luga were contained in the kitchen area by DC Pathak pending the completion of the search.
42DC Danson testified he had no contact with Mr. Luga’s sister and did not speak to her.
43DC Danson attended and searched Mr. Luga’s bedroom. The following items were found:
A loaded Zigana Px-9 handgun loaded with an extended magazine that had 13 rounds of 9mm ammunition.
A Glock extended magazine with 23 rounds of 9 mm ammunition.
A box with 30 rounds of 9mm Luger ammunition.
A flashlight for a firearm.
A tactical air soft pistol.
A replica shotgun.
A DPMS Panther Arms BB gun.
A black pistol BB gun.
44In addition to the items seized, several items were observed on the bed, the desk, and the night tables in the bedroom. The photographs show the state of the bedroom prior to the officers’ beginning a search including a grey sweatshirt with red writing Mr. Luga was seen wearing on May 16, 2022, at the Esso kiosk, a toque, a TV remote, Vaseline lotion, Starbucks Frappuccino, vapes, a grinder, empty chip bags on the floor, a grey sweat top on the bed, clothing on the closet floor, sneakers by the garbage bin, empty alcohol, water, pop, and ice tea bottles.
Evidence of Detective Matthew Oliver
45Detective Oliver has been employed with the Toronto Police Service since July 1999. From 2010 to 2025, he was assigned to the Gun and Gang Taskforce.
46In May 2022, he was part of the surveillance team focused on Mr. Luga and was part of the team involved in Mr. Luga’s arrest leading up to the search warrant.
47On May 17, 2022, the team set up in the area at 3:30 p.m. Det. Oliver received information at 4:06 p.m. that Mr. Luga had left his home with a small dog. He received information to arrest Mr. Luga.
48Mr. Luga was walking his dog on Lawrence Avenue East headed eastbound. Upon arrest, Det. Oliver located an iPhone in Mr. Luga’s right jacket pocket, and a driver’s licence and a Scotiabank credit card in his left pocket. Later in cross-examination, Det. Oliver confirmed it was a Scotiabank debit card and not a credit card.
49After Mr. Luga’s arrest, he was placed in an unmarked police vehicle and shown a copy of the search warrant by Det. Stolf. Mr. Luga was transported back to his home where Det. Stolf entered the security code into the security pad and the police entered the residence through the garage.
50Det. Oliver searched several parts of the residence, but specifically Mr. Luga’s bedroom. DC Danson also searched the bedroom.
51Upon entry into the bedroom, Det. Oliver noticed a pump action rifle on the bed that had an orange-coloured tip. He also noticed two other firearms and believed the items may have been replicas due to the orange-coloured tip on the item that resembled a rifle.
52Det. Oliver searched the nightstand on the right side of the bed near the closet. Inside the drawer was a Scotiabank document with the name of Jason Luga. A photograph of the document clearly identified the name Jason Luga on the bank statement.
53Det. Oliver was asked in cross-examination who was present when Mr. Luga was arrested. He only recalled DC Blake with him and was unable to recall where the other members of the team were.
54It was suggested that there was a stare-down between Mr. Luga and Det. Oliver just prior to Mr. Luga’s arrest. Det. Oliver did not recall this but remembers he was looking at Mr. Luga. Upon announcing they were police and arresting Mr. Luga for a firearm, Det. Oliver agreed that Mr. Luga asked what this was about or words to that affect.
55Det. Oliver did not remember searching a bedroom in the basement, but when prompted, agreed he obtained a key from Mr. Luga’s sister to access and search the bedroom identified as Calvin Luga’s bedroom, Mr. Luga’s brother.
56Det. Oliver confirmed a still photo taken from the booking video of Mr. Luga represented what Mr. Luga was wearing at the time of his arrest. The image shows Mr. Luga in a green olive or khaki coloured tracksuit wearing a grey patterned toque.
57Det. Oliver had no further dealings with Mr. Luga after the execution of the search warrant.
Evidence of Jason Luga
58The day the search warrant was executed, only Mr. Luga and his younger sister were at home. His mother had been away in New York for a week to two weeks helping his aunt, and his older brother had just left for a trip to Las Vegas with his girlfriend.
59While his mother was away, Mr. Luga had entertained several friends and hosted small parties. On the evening of May 16, 2022, he had gone out with two friends, Sekue Sangare and Zackaria. He had known them for four to five years. They hung out, smoked some marijuana, before heading to Subway to pick up some sandwiches.
60They returned to his home to hang out, play music, shoot BB guns, drink, smoke, eat their sandwiches and continue to party. At some point in the early morning hours, Mr. Luga was too tired to stay up and left his friends in his bedroom and went to sleep in a guest bedroom in the basement. He woke up in the late afternoon.
61When he awoke, he had several text messages and missed calls from his mother. His Scotiabank account was in overdraft, and she had been asking him to rectify it for a few days. He was hung over and tired of the messages. He retrieved his debit card and driver’s licence from the kitchen where she had left his documents, grabbed his dog, and headed to the bank. Mr. Luga did not go upstairs to his bedroom before leaving the house.
62Mr. Luga had no knowledge there was a loaded firearm in his bedroom with an extended magazine, a second extended magazine, or additional rounds of ammunition. He was unaware and had no information that either of his friends had possession of a firearm. He had never seen either of them with a firearm, and they had never discussed having a firearm with him. The first time he found out about the firearm, magazines, and ammunition was after his arrest.
63Mr. Luga’s evidence is set out in further detail in my analysis of the evidence.
Position of the Parties:
64It is the position of the defence that Mr. Luga had no knowledge that the firearm and extended magazines were in his bedroom. He had left his friends in his room and went to the basement to sleep and did not return to his room. In the days preceding the execution of the search warrant, his bedroom was shared with Sekue Sangare and Zackaria.
65Further, the Crown has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt an essential element of possession: that is, Mr. Luga knew these items were in his bedroom. The Court does not have to determine who owned the gun or how it came to be in Mr. Luga’s bedroom, it must only decide whether Mr. Luga had knowledge that the objects were there.
66The Crown argued Mr. Luga’s evidence should be rejected and there is sufficient evidence to prove he knew the firearm was loaded, knew there was a second extended magazine on his bed, and knew there was a box that contained additional rounds of ammunition. The items were found in Mr. Luga’s bedroom, on his bed, in plain sight and the Crown has established proof beyond a reasonable doubt on all four counts.
Legal Principles:
Elements of the Offence
67Section 4(3) of the Criminal Code provides: (3) For the purposes of this Act, (a) a person has anything in possession when s/he has it in his personal possession or knowingly (i) has it in the actual possession or custody of another person, or (ii) has it in any place, whether or not that place belongs to or is occupied by him/her, for the use or benefit of himself/herself or of another person; and (b) where one of two or more persons, with the knowledge and consent of the rest, has anything in his/her custody or possession, it shall be deemed to be in the custody and possession of each and all of them.
68Constructive possession is thus complete where the accused person: (1) has knowledge of the character of the object, (2) knowingly puts or keeps the object in a particular place, whether or not that place belongs to them, and (3) intends to have the object in the particular place for their "use or benefit" or that of another person: R v. Morelli, 2010 SCC 8, at para.17; R. v. Lights, 2020 ONCA 128, at para.47.
69The jurisprudence has made clear that often, the evidence relied upon to prove constructive possession is wholly or substantially circumstantial: Lights, at para. 48.
Circumstantial Evidence
70In R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33, at para.38, the Supreme Court of Canada stated, “the basic question is whether the circumstantial evidence, viewed logically and in light of human experience, is reasonably capable of supporting an inference other than the accused is guilty.” The Court went on to state that where the Crown’s case is dependent on circumstantial evidence, the question is whether the accused’s guilt is the only reasonable conclusion available on the totality of the evidence: para. 55.
71In R. v. Yizhak, 2026 ONCA 100, at para. 8, the Court of Appeal for Ontario affirmed,
In circumstantial cases, guilt must be the only reasonable inference available on the whole of the evidence. However, the Crown need not exclude every conceivable inference. As the Supreme Court explained in R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33, [2016] 1 S.C.R. 100, at para. 42, the Crown is not required to prove that no other inference is possible, and the trier of fact is not required to consider all conceivable inferences.
The Presumption of Innocence and Standard of Proof
72Mr. Luga is presumed innocent. That presumption remains with him unless and until the Crown establishes his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. There is no obligation on him to prove his innocence. Mr. Luga remains remain innocent unless and until the Crown has proven the elements of each offence beyond a reasonable doubt.
73A criminal trial is not a credibility contest, in which the Court picks the version of events it prefers more. Nor is it a question of which version a Judge thinks are more likely. Rather, the question is whether the Crown has established beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Luga is guilty of the offences charged: R. v. S. (J.H.), 2008 SCC 30, [2008] 2 S.C.R. 152, at para. 9.
74It is not enough for me to believe that Mr. Luga is possibly or even probably guilty. I must be convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. If after a careful consideration of all the evidence, I am not satisfied the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Luga committed the offences charge, I must find him not guilty.
W.D. Analysis
75While under no obligation to do so, Mr. Luga testified he had no knowledge of the firearm, ammunition, and extended magazines in his bedroom.
76The law is clear that if I accept the evidence put forward by the defence, then I must acquit. Moreover, even if I do not believe the defence evidence, I must consider whether I am left with a reasonable doubt by this evidence. If so, then I must acquit. Finally, even if I am not left with a reasonable doubt by the defence evidence, I must ask myself, based on the evidence that I do accept, whether I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of Mr. Luga’s guilt. If not, then I must acquit: R. v. W. (D.), [1991] S.C.R. 742, at 757 - 758.
77As in all cases, the court must assess the credibility and reliability of the evidence of the witnesses. To be relied on, a witness's evidence on an issue must be both credible and reliable. The Court may believe some, none, or all the testimony of any witness, including an accused person. Where the trier of fact is unable to decide whom to believe, the person accused is entitled to be found not guilty: S.(J.H.), at paras. 10-12.
Credibility and Reliability
78Credibility relates to the honesty or veracity of a witness, whether the witness is expressing themselves truthfully to the best of their ability.
79Reliability relates to the accuracy of a witness’ testimony - whether a witness has a strong recollection and memory of the event, whether they can recount details, and whether they are accurate.
80Credibility is not an all or nothing proposition. Nor does it follow from a finding that a witness is credible that his or her testimony is reliable. A finding that a witness is credible does not require a trier of fact to accept the witness’ testimony without qualification. Credibility is not co-extensive with proof: R. v. J.L., 2025 ONSC 7122, at para 32.
81A witness who fails to tell the truth is not credible and not reliable. However, a witness who tries to tell the truth to the best of their ability, and believes the truth of what they are stating, may be mistaken in their recollection. Witnesses may be convinced they are right but may still be wrong when faced with contradicting extrinsic evidence. A credible witness may give unreliable evidence: R. v. H.C., 2009 ONCA 56. Evidence must be both reliable and credible to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
82In assessing the credibility of a witness, I must consider any inconsistencies in their testimony whether internal or with prior statements. Inconsistencies on minor matters may be of less importance and not affect the credibility of a witness. However, inconsistencies that impact material issues can lead to a finding that a witness is not credible or reliable.
83The Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Kruk, 2024 SCC 7 provides guidance to judges when assessing the credibility and reliability of witnesses. Martin J.A., writing for the majority and reviewing earlier decisions, held that “testimonial assessment requires triers of fact to rely on common-sense assumptions about the evidence”: para. 72. This includes relying on reason and common sense, life experience, and logic in assessing credibility.
84When assessing credibility, I must examine the internal consistency of a witness’ evidence and its consistency with other evidence.
85A judge is entitled to reject an accused person’s evidence, even if it does not raise any problems, “based on a considered and reasoned acceptance beyond a reasonable doubt of the truth of conflicting credible evidence”: R. v. J.J.R.D., 2006 40088 (ON CA), at para. 53; R. v. R.A., 2017 ONCA 714, at paras. 55-56.
Analysis:
86As stated by counsel for Mr. Luga in her able submissions, I do not have to determine who the firearm and extended magazines belonged to or even how the items arrived in Mr. Luga’s bed, the issue I must determine is whether I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Luga knew the items were in his room.
87On May 17, 2022, at the time the search warrant was executed at the Luga residence, the only two persons home were Mr. Luga and his younger sister.
88On that date, Mr. Luga’s mother was away and had been for at least a week, if not two. His older brother and his girlfriend had left for Las Vegas that morning. The two cars in the driveway, the VW Jetta and the Ford Escape belonged to his brother and his brother’s girlfriend respectively.
89While his mom was away, Mr. Luga told the court he had parties and friends over continually. His house had become known as the “party house.” Photographs taken immediately prior to the search warrant being executed demonstrate the condition and status of each room of the house.
90The house is a large five-bedroom home. There are three bedrooms on the upper level, a kitchen, family room, living room, office, foyer, and mud room on the main level. The basement has two further bedrooms, a wine cellar, a steam room, sauna, exercise room, bar, and entertainment space.
91The kitchen was tidy except for two small pizza boxes left on the centre island. Aside from this, all was in order and did not reflect a “party house”.
92The photographs are confirmatory of a very tidy and organized home. The only room that was messy was Mr. Luga’s. Clothing he had been seen wearing within the forty-eight hours prior to the search warrant were on the floor and on his bed. This included the grey hoodie with red writing, and the camouflage toque/beanie.
93The nightstands and desk in Mr. Luga’s bedroom were crowded with empty drink containers that included alcoholic and non-alcoholic content. The garbage pail in the corner of his bedroom overflowed with used Kleenex and/or toilet paper. Chip bags and other food wrappings were discarded on the floor beside the garbage bin.
94Mr. Luga explained the heavy presence of used toilet paper or Kleenex overflowing from the garbage in his room was due to his allergies. He is allergic to the family cat, resulting in his nose running 24/7. He repeated this throughout his evidence.
95Mr. Luga woke up in the late afternoon of May 17, 2022, to several text messages and missed calls from his mother. His bank account was in overdraft, and his mother had sent several messages in the preceding days asking him to rectify the situation.
96Mr. Luga described the number of messages and calls as “hectic”. His mother was insistent he go to the bank immediately as she had been asking him to go for days. She told him she left his bank card and ID in the kitchen. Mr. Luga went to the kitchen to retrieve his bank card and ID and decided to take his dog for a walk at the same time.
97As he was leaving, his sister asked if he had spoken to their mother about his bank account. Mr. Luga responded that he was going. Mr. Luga was not in a good mood; he was a bit hungover and described his brain as being a bit cloudy. He did not go upstairs to his room, he did not stop to brush his teeth or wash his face, he did not change his clothes before heading to the bank. On the way to the bank, he was arrested.
98Contrary to submissions of counsel, Mr. Luga’s evidence lacks credibility and belief on many facets. The following are some examples of the issues I have with Mr. Luga’s evidence that impacts his credibility.
Banking
99In response to a question from his counsel regarding why his mom was asking him to go to the bank, Mr. Luga stated, “yea, she had gave me some money to put into the bank because my bank was in overdraft”. His lawyer clarified, if he was going to the bank to put money into his account, and he replied, “to take it out of overdraft, yea.” When Mr. Luga was arrested, the only items found on his person, was a debit card, his driver’s licence, and a cell phone. He was not in possession of any money.
100Mr. Luga was asked in cross-examination, why his mother would have his driver’s licence. He explained he was irresponsible and would lose things, so his mother kept his driver’s licence. When asked why she would have his bank card, Mr. Luga told the court the Scotiabank card was a joint account with his mom, so she would have access to it most of the time. This led to further questions about why, if it was a joint account, his mother did not simply transfer funds into it or deposit money into the account directly. It was also suggested that his mother could have e-transferred funds to Mr. Luga. Mr. Luga had no explanations other than maybe she did not have interact banking at the time.
101Mr. Luga could provide no explanation for heading to the Scotiabank other than he was following his mother’s orders. It invites the question of how Mr. Luga was to remedy the overdraft on his joint bank account with his mother, that required him to attend in person, to deposit the money that she had left for him, together with the bank card and ID, but somewhere, somehow, he forgot to grab the money?
Basement Guest Room
102Despite Mr. Luga’s allergic reaction to the cat, there was an absence of evidence of any used Kleenex or toilet paper in the guest room where Mr. Luga claimed to have slept. The only items out of order in the guest room, was an unmade bed, a partial glass of water on one side and an open reusable water container on the other side of the bed. Mr. Luga, who’s nose ran 24/7 due to the cat, certainly didn’t stop to clean up the guest room or pick up any used Kleenexes. We know this, because as he described, he needed to attend to the banking immediately and did not take time to attend to personal hygiene or change his clothing.
Friends
103Mr. Luga had known both Sekue Sangare and Zackaria since they were all 14 years old in grade nine. They went to different schools; however, their schools backed onto one another. He began to trust them and invite them to his home within two years of their friendship. Based on Mr. Luga’s evidence Sekue Sangare and Zackaria had been coming to his home for the past three years.
104They were so close with Mr. Luga and his sister, that she would braid their hair, and make crepes for them. They had been coming to his home for the past few years and were welcome there.
105Mr. Luga testified they had the freedom to come in and out of his house as they pleased. The visits, however, appear to be limited to Mr. Luga’s bedroom. There was no evidence they had the access code. Nor did they have a key to his room. Contrary to Mr. Luga’s evidence, they did not have unfettered access to the home or to Mr. Luga’s bedroom. This was controlled solely by Mr. Luga. Any visits were with the express permission or invitation of Mr. Luga.
106While in the home, Sekue Sangare and Zackaria did not have the run of the house but were constrained to Mr. Luga’s bedroom. Sekue Sangare and Zackaria may have been frequent guests, who came over hung out, partied, smoked, shot BB guns, made music, and video games. Although Mr. Luga provided an explanation regarding the closure of his curtains in his bedroom, it is unlikely on the evidence before this court it was for Sekue Sangare and Zackaria to sleep. Furthermore, it is evident in the photographs, you could see daylight through the one curtain sheer, contrary to his explanation. It did not appear that when Mr. Luga’s friends stayed late or into the morning hours it was to sleep.
107Contrary to Mr. Luga’s evidence that he trusted them implicitly, his actions speak otherwise. According to Mr. Luga, before he left his room to go the basement, He put away his favourite AK rifle. He put it away in his suitcase suggesting to his friends “don’t touch.” He explained that one was expensive, and he didn’t want them to damage it. Mr. Luga said he was shooting with that one at the time, and he removed the magazine and put it away before going to bed. It was suggested by the crown it was a trust thing, and if it wasn’t a trust thing there was no need to hide or put it away. Mr. Luga disagreed.
108Mr. Luga maintained he was unaware that either Sekue Sangare and Zackaria were in possession of a firearm and/or ammunition. He had never seen either of them with a gun nor had either Sekue Sangare and Zackaria ever confided in Mr. Luga that they were in possession of a gun or showed him a gun. Despite this, Mr. Luga asks this court to believe that his friends, or at least one of his friends, left their loaded firearm, a second extended magazine capable of holding thirty rounds of ammunition, and additional rounds of ammunition in his bedroom, without Mr. Luga’s knowledge on his bed in plain view, until their return.
109Mr. Luga testified that a cell phone found on his bed was not his either. The inference this court is asked to make, is that it belonged to either Sekue Sangare and Zackaria, who must have inadvertently left it behind.
110It defies logic that one of his best friends must have left the illegal firearm in his bedroom on his bed without telling him. Not only did one of these best friends leave the illegal firearm on his bed, but they also never told Mr. Luga they were in possession of an illegal firearm. Not only did they leave the firearm on his bed, but they also left the firearm loaded with an overcapacity magazine. Not only did they leave one overcapacity magazine, but they also left a second overcapacity magazine, and a box with an additional thirty rounds of ammunition – and never told Mr. Luga they were leaving these items there.
111Mr. Luga was arrested and held for bail. Upon his release, he confirmed in cross-examination that neither Sekue Sangare and Zackaria reached out to him. There were no inquiries about retrieving the cell phone found on his bed. There were no inquiries regarding his well-being. There were no inquiries about meeting up. There were no inquiries about what happened to the firearm and ammunition.
112A meeting was, however, arranged for May 31, 2022, around midnight at a park. Mr. Luga does not remember how the meeting was arranged or who contacted who. He went with a cousin. When they got the park, Sekue Sangare and Zackaria were present with three other individuals.
113Initially they were all just chilling and smoking, everything was friendly. Mr. Luga asked Sekue Sangare and Zackaria about the gun and their response was to attack him. The other three joined in. They slammed him against a car and shoved him to the sidewalk. They stole his cousin’s car keys. His cousin stood by helpless. When there was an opportunity, Mr. Luga and his cousin ran.
114Despite having known these two individuals for almost five years, and describing their relationship as “best friends”, Mr. Luga did not know Zackaria’s last name.
115Mr. Luga’s evidence about leaving Sekue Sangare and Zackaria unsupervised in his room, left on their own to continue partying, and shooting BB guns out Mr. Luga’s bedroom window is not believable or credible.
Property Receipt on Wall
116A property receipt was pinned to the bedroom wall of Mr. Luga beside a court notification for a next appearance. The receipt was for a black air pistol taken from Mr. Luga on April 4, 2019. The word “air” was scribbled out so the tag read “black pistol”. Mr. Luga was asked who blacked out the word “air”. He was clear it was not him and was a friend who did it but he could not remember who. He was asked by the Crown if the reason he kept it taped on his wall beside the court appearance slip from 2017, was as a trophy, he disagreed and denied that. He testified it served as “more of a reminder” and agreed it was a reminder to be careful about and with BB-guns.
117Mr. Luga further explained what led to the seizure of the “black air pistol”. When explaining the incident, in chief, Mr. Luga stated it was him and his cousin shooting bb guns out the window when one ricocheted and hit somebody. The person called the police, the police attended and spoke with Mr. Luga and ultimately seized the BB gun. In cross-examination, Mr. Luga agreed it was a friend he was shooting with on that date and not a younger cousin as first explained. He and his friend discussed who might have been responsible for hitting the family walking in the ravine and concluded it was his friend. However, it was still Mr. Luga’s airsoft pistol, and it was his house, and he went and spoke to the officer.
118After the incident in 2019, Mr. Luga lowered the birdhouse to ensure there wasn’t an opportunity for a pellet to ricochet and hit someone walking in the ravine.
119Agreed in the wee hours of May 17, 2022, he and his two friends were shooting BB guns out his back window. Mr. Luga explained that shooting the BB guns was a “great hobby of ours”, referring to his two friends, and “we’ve made sure that there is no way anyone was going to get harmed after that 2019 incident.” His reasoning for this was because no one is in the ravine after dark, there are no lights, no one would be walking there, and the backyard fence is high.
120Despite having kept the property receipt taped to his wall for three years, to remind him to be careful when using BB guns, it was not enough of a reminder to prevent him from shooting BB guns out his window with his friends after 1:30 a.m. after consuming alcohol and ingesting marijuana.
Rejection of Mr. Luga’s evidence
121When I consider Mr. Luga’s evidence, it is clear he has created a scenario to minimize and distance himself from his bedroom in the hours before the search warrant was executed. I do not accept or believe that Mr. Luga left his two friends alone in his room to go sleep in the basement. Nor does Mr. Luga’s evidence raise a doubt when considered with the evidence I do accept.
Has Proof Beyond a Reasonable Doubt been Established?
122Having rejected Mr. Luga’s evidence, I must decide on the totality of the evidence if I am satisfied that the Crown has established beyond a reasonable doubt the guilt of Mr. Luga: R. v. Smith, 2016 ONCA 25, at paras. 81-82. Where there are reasonable inferences other than guilt, the Crown’s evidence does not meet the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt: R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33, at para. 35.
123But those inferences must be reasonable based on the evidence and absence thereof, assessed logically, and using common sense and human experience: Villaroman, at para. 36.
124The Court of Appeal for Ontario recently stated in R. v. Campbell, 2026 ONCA 58, at para. 16, that “circumstantial evidence does not need to exclude every speculative or fanciful alternative explanation. It must exclude only reasonable alternatives grounded in evidence: R. v. Lights, 2020 ONCA 128 at para. 38.”
125The firearm and extended magazines were found in Mr. Luga’s bedroom, on his bed, in plain sight. Having rejected Mr. Luga’s evidence, I must now determine whether the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Luga knew these items were present.
126Counsel for Mr. Luga argued there was a gap in the evidence such that the Court should have a reasonable doubt. She points to the lack of fingerprints or DNA evidence from the firearm, ammunition, and/or the extended magazines. As recently stated in R. v. Hassan, 2026 ONCA 66, at para. 23, “A conviction does not require ballistic testing, recovery of the firearm, or DNA evidence where other reliable evidence establishes guilt.”
127The defence relied upon R. v. Loots-Scott, 2017 ONSC 7217, and argued the only difference between that case and Mr. Luga was that there were fingerprints that tied the ammunition to Mr. Loots-Scott, and the owner of the gun testified.
128Mr. Luga’s case is distinguishable from Loots-Scott for several reasons, including that the trial judge, Tzimas, J. accepted the evidence of Mr. Loots-Scott. The Court was also satisfied that his mother, who was the accused’s surety had recently searched his bedroom to ensure he was complying with his bail. There were approximately ten people staying in the home, two of whom were friends of the accused. Each had their own bedroom, but two of his friends, who had rooms near Mr. Loots-Scott would pick or manipulate his bedroom lock and access it without his knowledge. Both testified to this, including one who claimed to be the owner of the gun and testified he had put it in Mr. Loots-Scott’s room without his knowledge.
129I do not accept that Mr. Luga’s bedroom was a “shared bedroom” in the 24 – 48 hours prior to the execution of the search warrant.
130Counsel for Mr. Luga argued there were several people who had access to Mr. Luga’s bedroom, specifically Sekue Sangare and Zackaria.
131It was argued the police discontinued their surveillance at 1:30 a.m. and it is possible that either Sekue Sangare and Zackaria left and returned inside the residence.
132The defence asks this Court to speculate and consider alternatives that are not available on the evidence.
133Despite not having evidence regarding the comings and goings to the residence, the Crown is not required to disprove “every speculative or fanciful” suggestion.
134Shortly after R. v. Campbell, the Court of Appeal for Ontario confirmed in R. v. Yizhak, at para. 23, “This court has repeatedly affirmed the commonsense inference that guns are valuable, particularly where they are loaded and prohibited: see, e.g., R. v. Thompson, 2020 ONCA 361, at para. 11; R. v. Bonilla-Perez, 2016 ONCA 535, at para. 16; R. v. Buchanan, 2020 ONCA 245, 150 O.R. (3d) 209, at para. 61; R. v. Walters, 2023 ONCA 4, at paras. 21, 29.”
135Inferences regarding firearms does not only reflect market prices, but the inherent danger, difficulty of acquisition, and legal jeopardy associated with illegal firearms: R. v. Yizhak, at para. 24.
136The circumstantial evidence pointing toward Mr. Luga having possession of the firearm and extended magazines is overwhelming. Having rejected Mr. Luga’s evidence that he went downstairs and slept in the guest room in the basement, the only other inference available is that he slept in his bedroom, on the bed, beside the firearms, ammunition, extended magazine, and BB guns. His clothing from the previous day were strewn on the floor, his discarded subway wrapper is visible beside a night table and the garbage in his room.
137The fact that Sekue Sangare and Zackaria were seen by police entering the residence with Mr. Luga does not detract from the circumstantial evidence that Mr. Luga was in possession of the firearm, extended magazines, and ammunition.
138After considering the evidence that I do accept, I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Luga had knowledge of the firearm and extended magazines in his bedroom, a bedroom that he had full control over, and that he did not leave unattended.
139The loaded firearm, extended magazine, and additional ammunition were found lying on Mr. Luga’s bed, together with several BB guns. This is not a case where the circumstantial evidence, viewed logically and considering human experience, can support any other inference other than Mr. Luga’s guilt. To be clear, there is no other reasonable alternative conclusion based on the evidence or absence of evidence.
Disposition:
140For the foregoing reasons, I find Mr. Luga guilty on all four counts.
Rhinelander, J.
Released: March 16, 2026