2 total
The court clarified the interplay between judicial release orders, police undertakings, and endorsed warrants under the Criminal Code.
This decision addresses the application of the 'Ladder Principle' in bail hearings, particularly concerning the interplay between prior judicial release orders and subsequent police undertakings or summonses on the same charges.
The court clarifies that police bail does not supersede judicial release orders and that only a judicial officer can vary or cancel a judicial release order.
It examines the mens rea implications for defendants facing multiple release documents and proposes a re-organization of police undertakings for clarity.
The decision also details which types of arrest warrants can be endorsed for police release, emphasizing that warrants under s. 512.3 of the Criminal Code can never be endorsed, and that s. 512(1) warrants should only be endorsed in exceptional circumstances (like the COVID-19 pandemic).
Finally, it reiterates the police's discretion to release a defendant on an endorsed warrant.
All charges of assault and sexual assault were dismissed due to the complainant's unreliable and inconsistent testimony.
The defendant, M.A.M., was charged with multiple counts of assault and sexual assault against his wife and child.
The central issue was credibility.
The complainant was found to be an unreliable and evasive witness due to significant inconsistencies between her police statement and trial testimony, and her apparent willingness to minimize events.
While the defendant was also found not credible, the court could not make definite findings of fact due to the complainant's unreliability.
Consequently, all charges were dismissed as the Crown failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
