Vladimir Semyonov

Vera Kasotty pleaded guilty to Fraud Over $5000 and Arson, charges arising from an organized crime investigation into staged motor vehicle collisions for insurance fraud.

The Crown sought a jail term of two years less a day, while the defence argued for a conditional sentence of the same duration.

The court considered the principles of general deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation.

Despite the seriousness of the offences and their connection to organized crime, the judge found that a conditional sentence could adequately reflect sentencing principles given Kasotty's relative role, remorse, restitution, and lack of prior criminal record.

The accused was charged with driving with a blood alcohol level exceeding the legal limit contrary to section 253(1)(b) of the Criminal Code.

The Crown's breath samples were taken outside the two-hour window required for statutory presumptions to apply.

The defence advanced a Carter defence based on the accused's testimony regarding his alcohol consumption, supported by expert toxicology evidence suggesting his BAC would have been below the legal limit.

The court rejected the defence evidence as unreliable and inconsistent with the expert evidence regarding the accuracy of the breathalyzer readings.

The accused was found guilty.

The accused was convicted of theft under $5,000 and criminal harassment.

The offences involved the theft of personal items (diaries, address book, cellphone) and a subsequent orchestrated campaign of harassment including distribution of intimate images and creation of a fake dating profile to cause fear and control the victim.

The court imposed a blended sentence of 90 days intermittent imprisonment concurrent with a 6-month conditional sentence with strict conditions, followed by 3 years probation.

The sentencing balanced deterrence and denunciation with rehabilitation, considering the accused's family responsibilities and lack of prior record.

The accused was charged with assault, theft, and criminal harassment arising from a relationship breakdown.

The complainant alleged the accused grabbed her neck, splashed water in her eyes, and stole her cellphone, diaries, and address book on January 7, 2010.

Subsequently, the accused allegedly distributed non-consensual intimate images and created a fake dating profile in the complainant's name to 20-30 of her relatives, friends, and church associates between February 16 and March 6, 2010.

The court found the accused guilty of theft and criminal harassment but acquitted him of assault due to reasonable doubt regarding the police report noting no assaults.