Virgil E. Cojocaru

The accused was tried for sexual assault against his 18-year-old niece.

The Crown alleged the accused touched the complainant's breast and digitally penetrated her vagina without consent while she was drowsy from medication.

The court admitted the accused's out-of-court statements to a friend and expert psychiatric evidence called by the defence.

The court found that the accused touched the complainant's breast before asking if she was uncomfortable, and that any subsequent consent was vitiated by his abuse of a position of trust.

The court also accepted the complainant's evidence that the accused digitally penetrated her while she was asleep.

The accused was found guilty of sexual assault.

The applicant, charged with drug trafficking, brought an application for the disclosure of police disciplinary records relating to two officers involved in the investigation.

The court held that the disciplinary file of an officer who would not be called as a Crown witness was not first party disclosure and did not meet the 'likely relevant' threshold for third party records.

For the undercover officer who would testify, the court ordered the police to ascertain whether specific additional disciplinary records existed, but otherwise dismissed the application.