|
R. v. B.
Mr. B was nervous after he was criminally charged for the first time with a series of frauds involving cell phone companies. He had never been in trouble with the law before. Every accused person has the right to know what evidence the Crown has against them. It is the Crown’s obligation to obtain any relevant information from the police that it is aware of and provide everything that is not clearly irrelevant to the accused, regardless of whether or not it is to be called at trial or if it is inculpatory or exculpatory. Fraud charges often involve a lot of paperwork and Ms. Bristow noticed that the initial disclosure was missing a lot of it. There was virtually no evidence on a number of the counts against Mr. B. Ms. Bristow made numerous requests to the Crown Attorney’s office for more disclosure. Bits and pieces trickled in but there were still major holes in the Crown’s case that Ms. Bristow discovered. The Crown Attorney was reluctant to pull the case, but Ms. Bristow did not budge and pressed for the disclosure that Mr. B was entitled to have before making any decisions about resolution or trial. Eventually, the Crown Attorney realized that the holes in the case were not going away. Ms. Bristow proposed a diversion position, whereby the Crown would withdraw the charges after Mr. B completed some up front work. As a result of Ms. B’s advocacy for her client, he was able to keep his job and remain without a criminal record. 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
0 Comments
R. v. S.B.
Mr. S.B. was one of 54 people who were charged as part of Project Traveller, an organized crime operation involving the importation of firearms from Detroit, Michigan to Windsor, Ontario and the subsequent sale of those firearms to members of the Dixon City Bloods in Toronto. Mr. S.B. was the only person who went to trial and was acquitted of all counts by a jury of his peers. Originally he faced eight firearms related charges. Two were dismissed after the preliminary inquiry and one more was withdrawn prior to trial following thoughtful negotiations between Ms. Bristow and the Crown attorney. Ms. Bristow ran a focused trial whereby much of the Crown’s case was not contested. The first half of the trial, the Crown called evidence. On its face, the case against Mr. S.B. appeared strong. However, the tables turned once Mr. S.B. hit the stand. He testified to what was actually happening on the dates in question. Mr. S.B. came across as a credible witness, and the jury saw that. It was not without practice, however. Testifying is not a regular occurrence for most people. Sitting in a witness box, in front of 12 of your peers, knowing that your liberty is at stake is even scarier. Ms. Bristow and Mr. S.B. worked together to prepare his testimony and ensure that he did not feel nervous or get clamed up and rather testified with confidence and candour. After Mr. S.B. testified, Ms. Bristow made a tactical move and called a former co-accused to the stand. He had a lengthy criminal record and had plead guilty to the same offences that Mr. S.B. was charged with. However, he corroborated much of Mr. S.B.’s testimony which gave a ring of truth to what Mr. S.B. said. After a day and a half of deliberations and only one question the jury acquitted Mr. S.B. of all of the charges. Mr. S.B. walked out of the courtroom with tears in his eyes because his nightmare was finally over. 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 R. v. S.
Mr. S. has struggled with drug and alcohol addiction for many years. As a result, he had racked up charge after charge, all related to his addiction. Now Mr. S. already had a criminal record. It is rare that someone with a criminal record would be eligible for diversion, in other words a withdrawal of the charges in exchange for some up front work. Ms. Bristow, however, was able to craft a unique proposal for the Crown to consider permitting Mr. S. to complete a diversion program. The Crown agreed to the proposal and Mr. S. began addictions counselling. After some time, Mr. S. unfortunately re-offended. Often times, a Crown Attorney’s diversion offer would be off the table upon an accused person re-offending. However, Ms. Bristow. was able to negotiate with the Crown to permit Mr. S. to continue with his counselling to prove to the Crown why he deserved another chance. It took some time, but Mr. S. completed his up front work and then did some community service hours as part of the diversion program. Now Mr. S. has 5 fewer charges he has to worry about on his criminal record. Even better, he is well on the road to sobriety. 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
