|
R. v. D.
After the execution of a search warrant on Ms. D’s apartment, the police located 227.65 grams of powder cocaine in a single Ziploc bag. Ms. D was facing significant jail time (i.e. over 2 years). The defence was that Ms. D had no idea that the cocaine was in her home, but moreover that there were significant issues with the search warrant. Entering someone’s home is a momentous intrusion into a person’s privacy. The search warrant contained information from two (2) confidential informants. When relying on this type of information, it is required that it be compelling, credible and corroborated. Further, the person writing the information to obtain a search warrant has a duty to be full, fair and frank and has to swear that the contents are true. Ms. Bristow filed numerous applications with the court in preparation for Ms. D’s trial. One of the applications was an alternative suspect application, as there were other people who had access to her apartment. Another application was pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, arguing that the Ms. D’s right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure was violated. Leading up to the trial, Ms. Bristow also prepared Ms. D to testify in the event the Charter application was unsuccessful. However, it never got to the point where Ms. D testified because the Crown was convinced by the applications that Ms. Bristow filed and decided to stay the charges. Ms. D, who had no criminal record, was a single mother and had a good career as a personal support worker was thankful that this nightmare was finally over and she could move on with her life. If you have a criminal matter and would like to contact Ms. Bristow for a free consultation, please contact her by phone at 416-598-5741 or email at [email protected] Note: Past successes do not guarantee future successes
1 Comment
R. v. G.
Mr. G was charged with historical Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference charges over a two year period relating to his ex-girlfriend’s daughter. The assaults alleged stopped because his ex-girlfriend had allegedly caught Mr. G in her daughter’s bed late at night and kicked him out of the house. The first trial resulted in a hung jury, and the Crown decided to re-prosecute the case. As a result, the Crown knew Ms. Bristow’s defence as well as the evidence of Mr. G. The Crown’s case appeared strong with a fairly credible young woman as the complainant. Her evidence was partially corroborated by her mother, as well as her cousin, who she had disclosed the assaults to prior to the police being involved. This was no feat for Ms. Bristow, however, who worked diligently to poke holes in the Crown’s case, even using the complainant’s mother’s evidence to corroborate the defence theory. There was a clear motive to lie on the part of the complainant and Ms. Bristow highlighted that for the jury, which helped to secure the full acquittal for Mr. G. If you have a criminal matter and would like to contact Ms. Bristow for a free consultation, please contact her by phone at 416-598-5741 or email at [email protected] Note: Past successes do not guarantee future successes |
AuthorHere, I post various success stories I have obtained for my clients in court. Archives
October 2019
Categories |
RSS Feed
