W. Milko

The accused was charged with seven counts relating to the armed robbery of a pharmacy.

Three masked men entered the pharmacy, stole narcotics and cash, and fled in a vehicle.

The Crown alleged the accused was the planner and driver of the getaway vehicle, relying on circumstantial evidence including GPS tracking of the stolen narcotics, cell phone records, and video surveillance.

The court found the accused guilty of robbery, possession of narcotics over $5,000, and breach of probation, concluding he was a party to the offence.

However, the court acquitted the accused of the firearms charges, finding the evidence insufficient to prove constructive possession of the firearm abandoned near the getaway vehicle.

The applicant, charged with first-degree murder, brought a pretrial application to exclude his formal statement to police, alleging it was involuntary and obtained in violation of his rights under ss. 10(a) and 10(b) of the Charter.

The court found the statement was voluntary, as the police interrogation techniques did not overbear the applicant's will.

However, the court found that the police breached ss. 10(a) and 10(b) by failing to inform the applicant of the deceased's name or specific details of the murder charge, which prevented him from meaningfully instructing counsel.

Applying the Grant framework under s. 24(2), the court concluded that admitting the statement would bring the administration of justice into disrepute and excluded the evidence.

The offender, owner of a payroll company, was convicted of multiple counts of fraud and using forged documents after failing to remit client funds to the government and keeping the excess.

The total loss was $366,056.21.

The court found that general deterrence and denunciation were paramount, given the significant breach of trust and scale of the fraud.

The offender was sentenced to three years in custody, along with restitution and a fine in lieu of forfeiture.

The accused, owner of a payroll services company, was charged with fraud, theft, and uttering forged documents.

She was alleged to have over-deducted Employer Health Tax from clients and failed to remit funds to the Canada Revenue Agency, keeping the excess funds in her trust account for personal use.

The court rejected the accused's testimony as improbable and contradictory to documentary evidence.

The court found the accused guilty on all counts, concluding she intentionally defrauded clients of approximately $366,000 and forged bank documents to conceal the missing remittances.