An Ontario judge has sentenced a man to house arrest for sexually assaulting his biological sister, ruling that the mandatory minimum five-year sentence for incest with someone under 16 is unconstitutional and “grossly disproportionate” for offenders with intellectual disabilities.

The 26-year-old man, identified only as D.C. in the decision from Ontario’s Superior Court of Justice, was charged in 2022 for having sex with his sister for four years starting when she was 12 years old. Although he’s an adult, a defence expert testified that D.C. has an intellectual disability such that his cognitive age equivalency would be nine to 12 years old.

“Five years in a penitentiary is a tough sentence in any circumstances, and even more so for a first-time offender. When a developmental disability is added to that mix, in my view it becomes cruel and unusual,” Justice Anne Molloy wrote in a recent decision.

The judge convicted D.C. on two counts of incest and one charge of sexual assault.

She handed him a conditional sentence of two years less a day and three years of probation.

It’s “extremely rare” for judges to bypass mandatory minimums, said Wayne MacKay, a professor emeritus at Dalhousie University’s Schulich School of Law.

“The gap between a five-year minimum and house arrest is so large that that’s kind of striking,” MacKay said in a recent interview.

It could make the case ripe for appeal, he said.

“I think there is a big problem here because mostly the public is going to say that giving a house arrest as a penalty for something as serious as a sexual assault of a person under 16 and also incest really sends the wrong message to the public as to how serious we take that offence,” MacKay said. “I realize she’s balancing the disability and those appropriate considerations on the other side, but by having such a big gap, I think most people would find that problematic.”

In May 2022, D.C.’s sister, who also has intellectual disabilities, told her high school guidance counsellor “that her brother had been sexually assaulting her for years,” said the June 3 decision. She was 16 years old at the time.

The counsellor called police. Investigators charged D.C., who is six years older than his sister.

“Although the counts on the indictment date from when D.C. was already 18, and his sister was therefore 14, it is an agreed fact that they began when she was only 12 and it is relevant to take that into account on sentencing,” the judge wrote.

“These assaults included penetrative intercourse,” said the decision. “Sometimes, he would use a condom. Other times, when he did not wear a condom, he would go to the bathroom to ejaculate.”

The girl sometimes protested having sex with her brother, said the decision. She “felt pain, and did not enjoy it. He proceeded anyway. At other times, she did not protest, but she never subjectively consented.”

Sometimes D.C. watched pornography and emulated what he saw with his sister, telling her she “needed to know how these things felt as preparation for when she had a husband and wanted to get pregnant,” said the decision. “Sometimes, he would reward her for sex by giving her money or candy.”

She “surreptitiously audio-recorded” one sexual assault that was used as evidence against her brother.

"On the recording, the complainant can be heard telling D.C. she was in pain and also telling him to stop,” said the judge.

“She referred to him ‘just forcing it in.’ It is clear that D.C. heard these protests and that he nevertheless continued, if anything, with increased intensity.”

While D.C. may function as an adult (he graduated high school, got his driver’s licence, is employed in a warehouse and does not receive government assistance**)**, “his intellectual skills, including his capacity for moral reasoning, are substantially below the level of an adult,” Molloy said. “Because of his disability, he falls squarely within the concept of ‘diminished moral blameworthiness.’”

The judge recognized “that incest is one of the most heinous of sex crimes, with profound and typically long-lasting effects.”

At the end of the sentencing hearing, D.C. “took the opportunity to say that he felt sorry for what he did to his sister and his family and that he was trying to improve himself,” Molloy said. “He recognized he had caused pain and trauma to his sister and said it would never happen again. It seems to me that D.C. now has insight into what he did, and the pain he caused. I found him to be genuinely remorseful for his actions.”

D.C. needs education and guidance, she said.

“He is obviously capable of learning, and he is a person who likes to please others. He will benefit greatly from counselling about issues of sexuality and consent, as well as family parameters,” Molloy said.

“I doubt very much that he will learn these things within the confines of a federal penitentiary, where other inmates are simply not like him, and where courses would not be geared to his cognitive age. Moreover, the extreme tension and anxiety that will no doubt be triggered for him in that population are not conducive to learning, and particularly not conducive to learning about things like respect for others, kindness, personal boundaries, consent, and the like. I see great potential for rehabilitation with D.C. and I fear that sending him to prison would endanger, rather than enhance, his prospects for the future.”

The judge noted that “conditional sentences for sexual offences against children will only rarely be appropriate.”

But she was satisfied “that such a sentence in this case would not endanger the safety of the community. In my view, the conditional sentence option best supports specific deterrence and rehabilitation, and is sufficiently onerous to constitute denunciation and general deterrence.”

During his conditional sentence, D.C., who drives a forklift for work, must live with his grandmother.

He’ll be on house arrest for the first year and will be allowed to attend work and approved appointments, then a curfew for the second.

https://archive.ph/pdbS4

Court Decision: R. v. D.C. #2, 2026 ONSC 3029 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/klbg1&gt;

The getaway driver who helped pull off a notorious Toronto robbery at an ATM cash business five years ago has been sentenced to 21 months in prison for his role in the heist, which netted more than $1.1 million.

Ontario Superior Court Justice R.F. Goldstein handed down the sentence to Andrew Parsons, who pleaded guilty to robbery for acting as the decoy driver during the April 1, 2021 crime at Access Cash on Galaxy Boulevard.

The sentence will be served consecutively to the prison term Parsons is already serving for an unrelated home invasion robbery in Newmarket, Ont.

According to the ruling, Parsons followed the two masked robbers to the business in his blue Hyundai before waiting nearby while they forced two employees at gunpoint into a vault and stole approximately $1.146 million in cash.

After the two main culprits fled in a rented Mazda, Parsons met them nearby and drove them away with the stolen money.

Police later identified Parsons through surveillance video and his own statement after his arrest. The court said he admitted he was the "decoy" driver, knew there would be "beef" and expected "some type of violence."

Goldstein wrote that Parsons played "an important role" in the carefully planned robbery and knew violence would be used, although the Crown did not seek to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew a firearm would be used.

The judge said Parsons' moral blameworthiness was high, but lower than that of the two masked robbers who entered the business.

The judge also considered Parsons' conduct while on bail for the 2021 robbery. During that time, Parsons committed a home invasion robbery in Newmarket involving an imitation firearm.

Goldstein said that conviction could not legally aggravate the sentence for the 2021 offence, but it did affect his assessment of Parsons' prospects for rehabilitation.

Goldstein sentenced Parsons to 21 months (630 days), less 11 days' credit for pre-sentence custody, to be served consecutively to his existing sentence. He also imposed two years of probation, a lifetime firearms prohibition and a DNA order.

Police dubbed the high-profile robbery investigation “Project Heavy Bag” after surveillance video showed one of the robbers dragging an overfilled garbage bag of cash that split open, spilling bundles of money across the parking lot.

Toronto police announced multiple arrests in September 2021, recovered about $160,000 believed to be proceeds of the robbery during an unrelated police call, and seized several firearms during the investigation.

Devante Virgo and Emmanuel Rawson, the two masked robbers, were convicted after trial in 2024 of robbery with a firearm, conspiracy, forcible confinement and disguise with intent. They received prison sentences of eight years and 13 years, respectively.

Story: https://www.torontotoday.ca/local/crime-emergency-services/getaway-driver-sentenced-for-role-in-notorious-toronto-cash-heist-12510956

Judgment: R. v. Parsons, 2026 ONSC 3368 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/klp4b&gt;

What counts as a cellphone?

Turns out, for Ontario’s distracted driving laws, a lot. Any handheld wireless device that can make calls, texts, or transmit electronic data fits the bill.

And now, according to a new ruling at the Ontario Court of Justice, that also means a Presto card reader.

The definition landed one Wheel-Trans driver in hot water when he was slapped with a $500 distracted driving ticket — later reduced to $250 —for looking down at the Presto reader while stopped at a red light in Scarborough.

But according to Leon Presner, the paralegal who represented the driver at court, the expanded definition creates a bus-sized hole in the law that could open other transit drivers to similar fines.

The June 22 ruling unearthed what Presner said is a catch-22 facing transit drivers. On the one hand, transit agencies require drivers to use Presto machines to collect fares. On the other hand, provincial traffic laws dictate that merely holding a Presto machine while driving on any part of a public roadway — including at a bus stop — is a distracted driving offence.

Under the Highway Traffic Act, distracted driving rules apply anywhere on a public street. The law only grants an exemption if a vehicle is pulled entirely off the roadway or is lawfully parked.

Because a transit bus stopping to pick up passengers isn't legally parked, Presner said if a driver handles the Presto machine to troubleshoot a fare, they are technically committing an offence.

For Wheel-Trans drivers who sometimes handle the machines to assist passengers with disabilities, the ruling effectively criminalizes the tools they need to do their jobs, Presner said.

“What is the driver to do?” he said.

The incident occurred on Nov. 25, 2024, when the driver was stopped at a red light on Morningside Avenue. A police officer spotted the driver looking down at a device, and when the light turned green, the driver continued looking down before turning onto Kingston Road.

The officer pulled over the driver and issued a ticket — but never looked at the device itself.

During the trial, the driver admitted he was holding the device but said it was a mobile Presto machine, not a cellphone. He was waiting for it to reboot while traffic was stopped, so the next passenger could pay their fare.

The driver appealed his ticket, with Presner arguing the court should apply a “public interest defence” because the driver was required to use the machine to provide a public service. Emergency services workers, such as police and ambulance drivers, are already exempt from the law.

Presner argued that upholding the ticket would “amount to a fundamentally unjust outcome,” according to the court rulling.

Justice Brock Jones didn’t agree — but gave Presner kudos for raising the issue.

"With the greatest of respect, and acknowledging the creativity of this argument, I cannot agree," Jones wrote.

The judge said the driver was not actively picking up passengers, nor was his vehicle lawfully parked. Instead, he was sitting in active traffic at a red light with his attention elsewhere.

"It is a trite but important observation that driving is a privilege and that accidents can occur in a split second," Jones wrote. “Nothing prevented him from parking his vehicle and lawfully operating the device safely. He chose to hold the device while driving. Being stopped at a red light does not excuse his conduct.”

Justice Jones also dismissed Presner’s catch-22 argument on employer mandates, noting there was no evidence the TTC actually required the driver to use the machine while sitting in an active lane of traffic.

"It is difficult to accept that the TTC would expect anything other than its employees to operate its vehicles lawfully at all times," the judge wrote.

As for the broader implications, while Justice Jones said Presner raised other "hypothetical scenarios" regarding transit drivers “that might arise in the future, which are perhaps not as straightforward as what happened to the appellant,” the judge declined to rule on them.

“I must decide this appeal on the facts as found by the trial court and nothing more,” Jones wrote.

Even if he agreed with the larger argument, Jones said it wasn’t “his place” to “effectively rewrite this provision” of the Highway Traffic Act.

“That is a choice for the provincial legislature to make,” he wrote.

"The appellant, like any other citizen, can speak to his elected representatives if he so desires," Jones wrote. "What he cannot do is violate the law as written and then ask for an exemption because it suits his interests, however he wishes to characterize them.”

Article: https://www.torontotoday.ca/local/crime-emergency-services/distracted-driving-ticket-ttc-drivers-12501837

Judgment: Toronto (City) v. Lewis, 2026 ONCJ 376 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kls4d&gt;

Gaudet J.:

Overview

[1]         On November 28, 2025, I found Mr. Fraser-McAnuff guilty of one count of intentional or reckless discharge of a firearm into the Burrell family home, striking Mr. Neville Burrell in his right hip, as well as other firearms-related offences, including being in possession of a firearm and ammunition while under prohibition.

...

The Circumstances of the Offences

[5]         Just after midnight on June 16, 2024, Mr. Neville Burrell was alerted by his young daughter that someone had rang the doorbell and was at the door.  Mr. Burrell went to the main door, opened it and saw someone there he did not recognize.  It was Mr. Fraser-McAnuff, who was on his front doorstep asking him repeatedly and in an angry and aggressive tone “Where is Jennell?” Jennell is Mr. Burrell’s eldest daughter, who was at home in the basement at the time.  His eldest son Samuel was standing behind his father at the door.  The screen door remained locked.   

[6]         Mr. Burrell had never met Mr. Fraser-McAnuff before and asked him who he was.  When Mr. Fraser-McAnuff moved his hand to his right hip Mr. Burrell saw what he thought was a gun.  Mr. Burrell turned around and closed the door. 

[7]         Mr. Fraser-McAnuff then fired eight shots into the windows of the Burrell home from a handgun.  One of the bullets fired by Mr. Fraser-McAnuff struck Mr. Burrell in the right hip.  His son Samuel came up to him crying and asked him “Daddy what happened?”.  Mr. Burrell told him he had been shot. 

[8]         The entire Burrell family consisting of Mr. Burrell, his wife, and his five children was at home at the time of the shooting.  They had been celebrating Father’s Day earlier that day.  

[9]         Mr. Fraser-McAnuff had been speaking with his girlfriend Jennell earlier that evening on their cellphone, while she was at home watching TV with some of her siblings.  For reasons not adequately explained by Jennell Burrell, Mr. Fraser-McAnuff had made unsuccessful several attempts to call Jennell on her cell phone, starting immediately after midnight.

[10]      Six 40 calibre shell casings were recovered from the scene, and there were 8 bullet holes in the windows. 

[11]      It was agreed that at the time of the offences Mr. Fraser-McAnuff was bound by bail conditions that required him to be within his residence between the hours of 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. (except when in the company of one of his sureties), and which prohibited him from possessing firearms and ammunition. 

Mr. Fraser-McAnuff’s Personal Circumstances

[12]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff’s personal circumstances are set out in the PSR...

[13]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff is 27 years old, and was 25 at the time of these offences in June 2024.  He is single, has never been married, and has no children.

[14]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff was born in Toronto to parents of Jamaican descent.  He was primarily raised by his mother and grandfather as an only child, and lived in his grandfather’s home until the age of 17.  His mother moved out when he was 8 to live down the street.  He spent time at her home but spent most of his time at his grandfather’s.   He considers his grandfather as his primary parent.  As a child he recalled having weekend visitations with his father.

[15]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff has a grade 11 education. In December 2022, he earned a certificate from the College of Carpenters and Allied Trades. He has completed 228 hours in concrete framework.

[16]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff grew up in a “rough” neighbourhood, and experienced violence first-hand.  He was jumped outside of a library by a group of assailants and stabbed when he was 16, and had his wounds treated at the hospital.  He reported that as a result of this incident he has come to distrust people and the authorities. 

[17]      Mr. Fraser-McAnuff also experienced incidents of anti-black racism in his youth, which he described as having had significant impact upon him. He felt that he was treated differently at school and by police because of his race. The violence he has witnessed and the racism he has suffered have caused him to be withdrawn and untrusting.

Impact on the victim and the Burrell family

[18]      The wife of the victim, Mr. Burrell, read from a victim impact statement on her behalf and on behalf of the members of the Burrell family.  The written statement was also admitted.  Ms. Burrell described this incident as a nightmare for her family that they relive every day.  Bullets had been fired into their home by a stranger to them.  One of Mr. Burrell’s sons witnessed his father collapsing to the floor in pain after he had been shot.  After he was taken to the hospital Ms. Burrell gathered her children together and they all cried. They had to leave their home because they were afraid that the assailant would come back.  They remained out of their house for four months.  Their sense of security in their own home has been forever shattered.

[19]      Samuel Burrell described the anxiety he experiences every time he leaves the house, fearing that an incident like this could happen again, and explained that he did not want to answer the door for months afterwards because he was afraid of who might be on the other side.

[20]      Thankfully Mr. Burrell was able to recover from his injury.  However, the bullet remains lodged near his spine, and he must live with it for the rest of his life.

...

Disposition

[46]      In summary, Mr. Fraser-McAnuff is sentenced to eleven years imprisonment as explained above, less a credit of 423 days for pre-sentence custody and 30 days of Downes credit.  The time remaining to be served by Mr. Fraser-McAnuff is therefore 9 years and 277 days.

 R. v. Fraser-McAnuff, 2026 ONCJ 373 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/klp3t&gt;

I don't like starting posts in this subreddit with, "What is wrong with this country?"

But cases like this really do make me wonder.

The offender, in custody for MURDER, assaulted his cellmate, in what appeared to be a clearly sexual manner. Yet the judge won't find it was sexual (???) and then imposes a paltry 3 month jail sentence.

The victim suffered injuries and is surely terrified. Yes, he's also in jail but that doesn't mean inmate on inmate assaults should not be taken seriously. They should be. Indeed, one might think it was the type of case that would cry out for extreme punishment so that the jails aren't lawless hellholes.

You be the judge.

...

SPIES J. (Orally)

 Overview

 [1]               On April 6, 2026, the defendant, Leahain Jolanda Malcolm (“Mr. Malcolm”), was convicted of two counts of the included offence of assault, contrary to s. 265(1)(a) of the Criminal Code and one count of uttering a threat to cause bodily harm to the complainant, contrary to s. 264.1(1) (a) of the Criminal Code. The offences occurred on May 19, 2024, while the defendant and the complainant were both inmates sharing a cell at the Toronto East Detention Centre (“TEDC”). The facts relevant to these offences are set out in my decision: R. v. Malcolm, 2026 ONSC 2018.

[2]               Mr. Malcolm is now before me for sentencing.

The Facts

Circumstances of the Offence

 [3]               In summary, I found that in the middle of the night, while the complainant was sleeping on his stomach on the bottom bunk in their cell, he suddenly awoke to the pressure of Mr. Malcolm on his back and that he noticed that his boxers were down at the back below his bum. The complainant believed that Mr. Malcolm was trying to sexually assault him and he became very afraid and struggled to get away from Mr. Malcolm and to get some help from the Correctional Officers outside. Although I found it probable that Mr. Malcolm assaulted the complainant for the purpose of sexually assaulting him, I was not satisfied of that and found it was possible that something provoked Mr. Malcolm to simply attack the complainant and in the struggle that followed the complainant’s boxers were pulled down.

[4]               I also found that once the complainant struggled and got away was standing at the cell door yelling and banging on the door trying to get assistance from one of the Correctional Officers that Mr. Malcolm then physically tried to stop him by trying to push or pull the complainant away from the cell door.

[5]               Finally, I found Mr. Malcolm told the complainant to shut up and that he threatened to harm him or that the others would harm him if he told anyone about the assault. 

...

Circumstances of Mr. Malcolm

 [6]               I do not have a pre-sentence report (“PSR”), but Ms. Shields filed two psychiatric reports that were prepared for another trial where Mr. Malcolm was facing a charge of first degree murder of his husband, Mr. Brown, who was stabbed to death on February 27, 2021 (the “Reports”).  I have a report from Dr. Lisa Ramshaw, a forensic psychiatrist, who provided a report dated July 31, 2023, pursuant to an order from a judge of this court for the purpose of conducting a psychiatric assessment of criminal responsibility of Mr. Malcolm with respect his murder charge. I also have a report from a psychiatrist, Dr. Derek Pallandi, dated June 6, 2025, to counsel for Mr. Malcolm. He was asked to provide an opinion from a psychiatric perspective of Mr. Malcolm’s conduct that ultimately led to the homicide of his husband and specifically to consider whether or not he suffered from symptoms of a mental disorder at the material time which may have materially influenced his ability to appreciate the nature and quality of his actions or to know that they were wrong.

[7]               Mr. Malcolm had no criminal record at the time he committed the offences before me, but I was advised that he was found guilty of second degree murder by Justice McArther of this court in connection with the stabbing death of his husband and that his sentencing hearing is still to be conducted.

Circumstances of the Complainant

 [14]           The complainant sustained bruises and scratches to the back of his legs during the assault. When the complainant walked into court to give evidence, he did so using a cane. When he was asked about this in cross-examination, he testified that in addition to arthritis in his knees he now has nerve damage in his leg due to the altercation and that he did not need a cane then, but he does now. This evidence was not challenged.

[15]           The complainant also provided a Victim Impact Statement (“VIS”), and he attended the sentencing hearing virtually from the TEDC. The complainant appeared by Zoom at the sentencing so he could read his VIS to me but unfortunately despite Ms. McPhedran’s efforts he was not given a copy of his statement. Ms. McPhedran read it into the record for him, and he confirmed its accuracy.

[16]           In terms of physical injury, the complainant he referred to the fact that he now must use a cane. He also reports that the dosage of his medication for his seizure disorder needed to be increased and other medications added. His VIS focused on the psychological injury he has and continues to suffer as a result of the offences. He and Mr. Malcolm are both still at the TEDC and the complainant believes that Mr. Malcolm or someone still wants to kill him. This has not been proven as a fact, but I accept that the complainant believes this. As a result, he does not sleep well at night. Every noise wakes him up. He now can’t tolerate a cell mate and does not like to be around people. He is in the medical or isolation unit. When he is out on the range, he sits at the table and does not speak to anyone or make eye contact with anyone. He just wants to be left alone and reports that is life will never be the same again.

...

Final Disposition

 [42]           Mr. Malcolm please stand.

[43]           With respect to your conviction on Count #1 the included offence of assault, I sentence you to three months in custody.

[44]           With respect to your conviction on Count #2 the included offence of assault, I sentence you to three months in custody to run concurrent to your sentence on Count #1.

I'm linking this decision because the judge exceeded a joint sentencing position of 90 days and imposed 12 months jail instead. The accused stole from two LCBOs. This is actually quite unusual as these types of thefts are not normally taken this seriously in the OCJ.

...

WENDL J.:

[1]         Manjeet Singh pleaded guilty to two counts of theft under $5,000 from the LCBO and one count of breach of probation by attending an LCBO. The Crown and the defence submitted a joint position of 90 days’ custody for my consideration.

[2]         The basis for the joint submission was that Mr. Singh is expected to be deported upon completion of his sentence. As a result, I requested confirmation of that position and adjourned the matter. On the return date, I was advised only that he may be deported or that deportation was merely a possibility. Consequently, I advised counsel that I had concerns with the joint submission and, pursuant to Anthony‑Cook, requested further submissions.

[3]         On today’s date, I advised I would not be acceding to the joint submission and again asked for further submissions.

FACTS

[4]         On June 3, 2025, at approximately 2:07 p.m., Manjeet Singh attended the LCBO at 2273 Rymal Road East in Hamilton with two other individuals. They entered the store, selected alcohol, and placed it into a shopping cart. Together, they took:

•         10 bottles of Johnnie Walker Black Label ($127.45 each); and

•         4 bottles of Johnnie Walker whisky ($86.25 each).

[5]         They exited the store without paying.

[6]         Later that same day, at approximately 3:45 p.m., Mr. Singh and the same individuals attended another LCBO at 1191 Wilson Street West. They selected:

•         6 bottles of Grey Goose vodka ($74.95 each);

•         12 bottles of Smirnoff vodka ($69.95 each);

•         6 bottles of Crown Royal ($47.95 each); and

•         1 bottle of Forty Creek whisky ($72.00).

[7]         They again left without paying. The total value was $3,268.30, none of which was recovered.

[8]         At the time of these offences, Mr. Singh was bound by a probation order prohibiting him from attending any LCBO in Ontario.

...

[33]      In my view, considering the factors outlined above—the amount of alcohol stolen, the sophisticated, organized, targeted, and brazen nature of the thefts, the impact on the LCBO and residents of Ontario, his criminal record, the fact that he was on probation not to be in an LCBO, his prospects for rehabilitation, the principle of totality (given he is serving a 8-month sentence)—I find that an 12-month sentence is appropriate. 

[34]      In coming to my conclusion on the appropriate sentence I have also considered the parity principle, and I find that the ordinary range for an LCBO theft does not apply.  This is not a regular theft from the LCBO.  This is an organized and systematic campaign targeting LCBO with the intent of stealing thousands of dollars’ worth of alcohol, the impact of which affects every person in Ontario in terms of diminished revenue to help pay for government services. 

[35]      Since the appropriate sentence is four times the position the joint submission and given the factors mentioned in the preceding paragraph, I find the proposed 90-day sentence to be unhinged from the reality of the situation.    

[36]      Having made that determination, I turn to whether the sentence brings the administration of justice into disrepute. Here, there are no redeeming factors, there are no issues with the Crown’s case; I am not aware of any assistance provided by Mr. Singh; while I am troubled by his addiction, his background alone does not tip the balance; and deportation is not a factor I can consider, nor can I find that it will occur, and even if it were considered, it would render the sentence disproportionate.  Moreover, this is not case like Harasuik[6] where the cluster of offences committed by the appellant was varied and unique.  This is a straightforward matter two thefts from the LCBO, on the same date, while he was on a probation order not to attend that establishment. 

[37]      As a result, since nothing redeems this unhinged sentence and no greater good is served by acceding to it, I find it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. Accordingly, I impose a sentence of 12 months concurrent on the theft charges and 60 days concurrent on the breach of probation. The message needs to be clear: organized and systematic theft targeting of the LCBO will be severely sanctioned. 

R. v. Singh, 2026 ONCJ 377 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/klrfk&gt;

A Toronto man convicted of second-degree murder of his four-year-old son has been sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 16 years.

Ontario Superior Court Justice John McMahon sentenced Joel Roberto, 39, on Friday in a Toronto courtroom. The sentence means Roberto, who has been in custody for nearly 12 years, will have to serve four more years before he will be eligible to apply for parole.

"In a murder trial, no one wins. Everyone loses. But justice still must be done," McMahon said.

Roberto and his partner, Ravyn Colley, have been convicted twice for killing the boy, Jaelin Roberto Colley, on Oct. 13, 2014.

Initially in 2017, Roberto was convicted of second-degree murder and Colley was convicted of first-degree murder. Both were granted new trials after a successful appeal, and at their retrials, juries convicted both of second-degree murder. The couple has been in custody since their arrest.

Court heard that Jaelin was found emaciated, without vital signs and with blunt force injuries to his head, in the couple's North York rental townhouse on Finch Avenue E. near Leslie Street. Toronto paramedics pronounced the boy dead in the ambulance outside of his home.

McMahon said the boy's younger brother, three at the time of the murder, will be the most affected by the killing.

"He will never have his older brother, Jaelin, to share the joys of a lifetime together. At some point, when that young person is older, he will learn his father murdered his older brother, as did his mother. A terrible tragedy he will live with for the rest of his life," McMahon said.

Father did nothing to protect his son, judge says

Roberto held his head down and wept as the judge reviewed the circumstances of his older son's death. McMahon said Jaelin died after he suffocated on his own vomit. He had severe injuries to his head and face and had been starved for weeks or months.

McMahon said he accepted that the boy's mother, Colley, was the one who inflicted the injuries and denied food to the boy, but he found that Roberto did nothing to protect his son.

Nearly an hour before he died, Roberto took a video of the boy who was semi-conscious at the time. McMahon said it is cold-hearted and incomprehensible to him that Roberto chose to take a video of his child in great distress but did not seek medical help.

When he did call 911, he lied to the 911 operator, saying Jaelin was still breathing and had fallen down the stairs two days earlier.

A post-mortem examination found that Jaelin died from blunt force trauma while choking on his vomit. Severe malnutrition was also a contributing factor. He weighed 27.6 pounds. The judge said Jailen weighed less than when he was last seen by a doctor when he was only 20 months old.

The post-mortem also found that Jaelin had multiple injuries all over his body and had been dead before the call was made. He had suffered injuries to both legs and a broken wrist.

Parents frustrated over toilet training issues, court heard

At trial, the Crown had argued that Colley and Roberto were frustrated over the child's toileting accidents. In his reasons for sentencing, McMahon said there was "mounting frustration" with Jailen due to toilet training issues and other suggested behavioural concerns.

Roberto, for his part, apologized to the court on Friday, saying he could have saved his son.

"I was a coward and part of me will always feel that way," Roberto said. "I will always carry this pain and failure to my last days. I deserve no less."

A sentencing hearing for Colley will be held at a later date.

A Mississauga man found not criminally responsible for the 2011 stabbing death of his wife in front of their child has voluntarily returned to hospital this spring after re-experiencing psychotic symptoms of his paranoid schizophrenia.

So what does the Ontario Review Board decide at Victor Avidago’s annual hearing this month while he was still hospitalized at CAMH? They declare the 62-year-old no longer poses a significant threat to the public and should be granted an absolute discharge.

What in the world of sanity are they thinking?

One board member disagreed

Not everyone agreed with this outrageous decision.

One dissenting board member said Victor Avidago continues to pose a danger and should remain conditionally discharged, meaning he can live in the community – as he did before the recent return of his symptoms – but continue to be under the watchful eye of the ORB.

Why not err on the side of caution when it comes to public safety?

On March 22, 2011, the drywaller was in his Mississauga kitchen with and his dental hygienist wife Maria Rosaria Avidago. She’d just baked a cake and Victor Avidago seemed to be going to cut a slice when he suddenly turned the blade on his wife of 18 years.

Their 13-year-old daughter was home sick from school that day and begged him to stop, but he continued to stab her mother 46 times.

Neighbours could hear the mom of two screaming, “Help me. He is killing me. Please help me.”

When Peel Regional Police arrived, Victor Avidago kept them at bay with a knife for 10 long minutes and demanded, “Shoot me,” as his 43-year-old wife bled out on the kitchen floor.

Found NCR due to paranoid schizophrenia

Charged with second-degree murder, he was found NCR in 2013 due to his paranoid schizophrenia at the time..

Originally held in the secure unit at CAMH, the ORB report said Victor Avidago improved with anti-psychotic medication and eventually progressed to supportive housing in 2019 and then independent housing two years later.

But his stable mental health began to decline at the end of 2023 when he stopped taking his meds after contracting covid-related pneumonia.

“On Feb. 5, 2024, one of Mr. Avidago’s daughters contacted his case manager to inform her that family members had found knives hidden around his apartment and they were now concerned for theirs and their father’s safety. Mr. Avidago was brought to CAMH by police. He was eventually transferred to Mount Sinai’s General Medicine unit and then to their Inpatient Psychiatry unit on February 20, 2024,” the ORB decision states.

Back on his anti-psychotic medication, Victor Avidago improved and returned to living in his apartment while under the care of his psychiatrist and monitoring by the Forensic Outpatient Services.

Admitted to CAMH last month when psychotic symptoms increased

But in January 2026, he reported an increase in his psychotic symptoms. And on May 5, after he hadn’t left his apartment for days because of increasing paranoia about being out in the public, Avidago was admitted to CAMH pursuant to the Mental Health Act and detained on the Psychosis Recovery Treatment Unit as a voluntary patient.

“Mr. Avidago remained a voluntary patient at the time of the hearing,” the decision states with absolutely no irony at all.

When his psychiatrist was asked why he was recommending an absolute discharge for a patient currently hospitalized, he assured the ORB that Avidago demonstrated insight into his illness and a readiness to go to hospital if needed.

Which is commendable, of course. But why the rush to grant an absolute discharge when he’s clearly struggling with his mental health and his medication is being adjusted yet again?

The lone dissenter on the five-member ORB panel said it was concerning that Avidago has a history of stopping his meds when he doesn’t like the side effects and it’s too soon to know his reaction to his newly increased dosage.

“When paranoid, as we have seen in the index offence, his violence can be lethal or it can be quietly demonstrated through the hiding of knives at his apartment as in 2024,” she warned. “In the view of the minority, there are too many unknowns regarding the ongoing mental stability of Mr. Avidago to grant an Absolute Discharge.”

But her sage advice was ignored.

By Betsy Powell Courts Reporter

Two teens sat in the prisoner’s box wearing blank expressions as they watched chilling videos of themselves carrying out a series of brazen contract shootings two years ago — a stark illustration of recent warnings that young hired guns are behind cycles of bloodshed in the Toronto area.

Prosecutors played the videos on Wednesday at the downtown Toronto courthouse during the sentencing hearing of R.R. and K.A., two teens who pleaded guilty earlier this month to multiple counts of reckless discharge of a firearm and accessory after the fact to reckless discharge of a firearm. The hearing took place at the same time a funeral was underway for Toronto police Const. Marc Pinizzotto, 43, allegedly shot to death by a 19-year-old working for a gun-for-hire network.

The Crown attorneys are urging the judge to impose the agreed‑upon three‑year youth sentence — the maximum under the Youth Criminal Justice Act — without credit for the time the teens have already spent in pre‑trial custody.

If the judge accepts that position, their custody terms would begin only once Superior Court Justice Maureen Forestell delivers her sentence on July 13.

The teens cannot be identified under the Youth Criminal Justice Act.

Over two days in late June 2024, the pair along with A.P. — another teen — drove around Scarborough and Richmond Hill in stolen vehicles. While R.R. did not discharge a weapon, he “abetted,” encouraged and recorded his gun-toting companions opening fire on various “targets” — cinemas, autobody shops, a towing company, a takeout restaurant, an elementary school and a cannabis dispensary — Crown attorney Sharna Reid told the judge.

No one was injured, though surveillance camera footage and cellphone videos show some near misses, such as a daylight burst of gunfire discharged outside a cinema with patrons nearby.

“It’s really just by luck not design,” that people weren’t injured or killed, Reid said.

That changed on July 6, 2024 when A.P., then 16, fatally shot 28-year-old Sulakshan Selvasingam in a gas station on instructions from “influential adults” to shoot the tow truck driver and record his murder.

Footage played in court Wednesday showed just how “nonchalant” A.P. and K.A. were as they repeated instructions to shoot Selvasingam in the head, and discussed the possibility of earning a bonus if they provided video proof, Reid said.

Defence lawyer Savreet Chuckal, representing R.R., disagreed with the prosecutor’s characterization. She described them as “young people who are not mature,” and asked the judge to consider that her client did not fire a gun, and that “events would have occurred without his participation.”

Reid, however, told the Forestell the pair were “working together,” and “should be held equally guilty.”

‘I go to bed hearing them cry from their rooms’

During Wednesday’s hearing, Selvasingam’s sister sobbed as she read a victim impact statement describing her brother as the caretaker of their immigrant family who came to Canada with nothing after fleeing civil war in Sri Lanka. “Everything he did was to repay my parents for the sacrifices they made for us,” she said, her mother and father sitting in the body of the court.

Her father, despite health issues, has had to continue working, she said. “Sulakshan made sure he took care of my brother who has a disability as well. It hurts me to see my parents cry everyday. I go to bed hearing them cry from their rooms.”

Chuckal, along with defence lawyer Craig Bottomley, who represents K.A., argued that failing to grant their clients credit for the time spent in custody would undermine the spirit of the YCJA, which is to rehabilitate young people and promote their successful reintegration into society.

Both lawyers stressed the young age of their clients at the time of the offences, the fact that neither had a prior youth record, and the family support documented in numerous letters filed with the court. K.A. was just 14 at the time of the shootings.

Two days of “very bad” behaviour, is not months and months of criminality, Bottomley told the judge.

The Crown had initially intended to seek adult life sentences for the teens. But prosecutors abandoned that plan after two 2025 Supreme Court of Canada rulings sharply limited when youth can be sentenced as adults. Those decisions reaffirmed the YCJA’s presumption that young offenders should be dealt with under the youth regime except in the most exceptional circumstances, and they raised the legal threshold for imposing adult penalties.

As a result, A.P. will be sentenced as a youth, where the maximum for first‑degree murder is a blended 10‑year term of custody and community supervision.

The identities of the youths are protected under the YCJA.

https://archive.ph/gIeRC

The Pickering husband and the hit man thought they could get away with killing his wife.

But in 2018, a judge convicted David Knight and Graham MacDonald of first-degree murder in the death of mom Carmela Knight, 39, after the hired assassin unwittingly confessed the plot to “friends” who were actually police officers involved in a three-month undercover sting operation.

On appeal, they claimed MacDonald’s “Mr. Big” confessions were an abuse of process and should have been inadmissible. Ontario’s highest court has just disagreed.

In 2014, Carmela, the mother of two, had discovered her husband was having an affair and demanded a divorce along with child and spousal support. She had just filed an emergency family court motion for sole possession of the marital home that was to be heard in three days. Court heard Knight’s answer was to hire MacDonald to strangle her to death, drag her body into the garage, douse her with gasoline and set her on fire.

Court heard he would then be able to be with his Florida mistress and collect on his wife’s $850,000 life insurance plan — cash he needed to close on his purchase of a Florida construction business.

Body found in burnt-out garage

On Sept. 15, 2014, firefighters put out the blaze in the family’s Pickering garage on Pebblestone Cres. and discovered Carmela’s charred body: She’d suffered blunt-force injuries to her face and had died of strangulation. Court also heard the scene had been staged to make her death look like a suicide — a tourniquet was wrapped around her arm, a syringe was found nearby and someone had unsuccessfully tried to inject cocaine into Carmela’s arm.

Knight was an obvious suspect, but he was at hockey practice at the time with the couple’s two sons. Acting on a tip, Durham Regional Police learned MacDonald, a handyman with an extensive criminal record, was Knight’s friend and may have done some work at the family home.

They targeted MacDonald in an elaborate “Mr. Big” operation — a controversial Canadian police technique where undercover officers create a fictitious criminal organization to befriend a suspect and elicit a confession.

Court heard that MacDonald met “Rob” at the Port Hope motel where he was staying and over the course of three months they became good friends as MacDonald helped Rob in fictitious sales of stolen property. Rob then introduced MacDonald to his mentor “Uncle Dan,” who had previously helped him get out of trouble with the law.

He, of course, was unaware that both men were undercover officers recording his every word.

Murder plot discussed for months

Court heard MacDonald needed help — he confessed to Rob and Uncle Dan that he’d killed Carmela in exchange for $100,000 and a job in Florida, but Knight had only paid him $2,000 and then disappeared. Uncle Dan offered to get his dying friend “James” to confess to the murder in return for $20,000 to be paid to his surviving kids, but he’d need all the details to make it convincing — which MacDonald provided to a third cop posing as a man with terminal cancer.

He boasted to his new friends that he and Knight had discussed the murder plot for months, court heard, and had planned to spike her morning smoothie until the suspicious Carmela stopped drinking them.

On the day of the murder, he said Knight drove him to his house and he hid in the basement until Knight left with his kids to hockey practice. MacDonald said he then waited until Carmela came home and after a heated struggle, court heard he choked her to death with a ratchet strap, staged the scene in the garage, planted cocaine in her purse, set her body on fire and fled, narrowly escaping the blaze.

The hit man’s confessions, recorded by the undercover officers, guaranteed his conviction at his judge-alone trial. At Knight’s trial before a judge and jury, MacDonald refused to testify, but the judge found enough independent evidence to allow the jury to hear the police recordings.

Knight, too, was convicted and both killers were sentenced to an automatic life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years.

The Court of Appeal found no errors were made by either judge at the men’s trials, so they will remain where they belong.

“He was supposed to love and protect Carm, not murder her,” Carmela’s grieving mother Franca Agosta was quoted as saying by durhamregion.com at Knight’s sentencing hearing in 2019. “He had no mercy for Carmela and the court should have no mercy for him.”

mmandel@postmedia.com

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/pickering-husband-hit-man-lose-appeal

The judge's reasons for sentencing in this case are now online.

The original thread in this discussion group is here: https://www.reddit.com/r/CrimeInTheGta/comments/1qj63r8/toronto_man_colin_hatcher_killed_his_mom_kathleen/

JUSTICE S. NAKATSURU

[1]               Redemption.  It is a powerful thing. If given from your family. But also, if given by the greater community. I cannot be sure if it is personally important to you. But it is important to us. As human beings, the vast majority of us believe in redemption.  That you can be someone other than the killer that you are. That you can change. Be treated. Gain lasting insight. No longer be a danger to your family or others. And ultimately be forgiven for your crime. And take your place back into society.

[2]               The law recognizes the possibility of redemption. It must. If it is to reflect the compassionate nature of who the best of us truly are.

[3]                The offence of murder is most serious. The punishment is life imprisonment. To serve the rest of your life behind bars. That sentence is mandatory and fixed. But even for murder, there remains a chance of redemption. To get parole.

[4]                For second degree murder, I am given the power to decide at what time, after 10 years, you can get a chance for that. To be able to redeem yourself.

[5]                Whatever I decide, the path to that is long. And will take work. Every day. Over many months. Indeed, over long years.

...

[12]           I wholeheartedly agree with the Crown that killing one’s mother is an aggravating circumstance. The law in the Criminal Code of Canada explicitly says it is. The cases expand on the reasons for that. But the facts of this case really show why.  Your mother who gave birth to you, nursed you, cared for you when you were a child, encouraged and supported you even during the rough patches of your teens, took pride and joy in your accomplishments, and never turned her back on you when you became ill and a danger to her and the family. She trusted you. Even when there was good reason not to.  You betrayed that trust. And your crime was directly connected to the fact that she was your mother.

...

[16]           But clearly, the most important mitigating factor is the fact you were suffering from schizophrenia.  Although you did not meet the test for not criminally responsible due to mental disorder, as I have found, your serious mental illness played a very big role in this crime. That was very clear to me.

[17]           In R. v. Ellis, 2013 ONCA 739, at para. 117 the Ontario Court of Appeal found that “[w]here mental illness plays a role in the commission of the offence, the offender's culpability may be diminished, punishment and deterrence may be ineffective or unnecessary and treatment and rehabilitation of the offender may be paramount considerations.”

...

[24]           In conclusion, I have considered carefully the sentencing principles of denunciation, deterrence both general and specific and rehabilitation. It is my decision that you will be sentenced to life imprisonment with a parole ineligibility period fixed at 11 years. Looking at all the circumstances, this offence does not approach the higher range in that it does not share similarity to first-degree murder. Yet there is the aggravating circumstance of killing your much beloved mother.  On the other hand, your severe illness and its central role in the offence, is significantly mitigating. Looking at all the mitigating circumstances, parole eligibility should be on the lower end. The diminished moral blameworthiness and the diminished need for deterrence support that conclusion.

https://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2026/2026onsc3552/2026onsc3552.html

A judge defended the one-day sentence he handed a carjacker who stole a Toronto driver’s Mercedes at gunpoint, blaming the man’s jailers for failing the community.

Jaiden Robinson, who spent 809 days (two years and 79 days) in pre-trial custody, pleaded guilty in the Ontario Court of Justice to robbery with a prohibited weapon for a March 2024, mid-afternoon carjacking at the Shops at Don Mills. Both the Crown and Robinson’s lawyer recommended he get the mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison.

“Some decry what they call the court’s catch-and-release approach to criminal justice,” Justice André Chamberlain wrote in a recent decision where he ruled that Robinson would have to spend just one more day in prison.

“If they truly believe that incarceration is the answer to our criminal justice problems, they should admit that the correctional institution’s neglectful approach to inmate care has led to shorter sentences, less time in custody, and lower rates of incarceration, even for serious offenders in some cases. The jails are the ones failing the community, the inmates, and the justice system.”

Despite repeated attempts from the courts and requests from Robinson, he didn’t get medical or dental treatment behind bars for an ankle injury or a broken tooth he suffered during his arrest, the judge said in his June 9 decision.

The court heard that Farzin Shahid-Noorai parked his 2023 Mercedes-Benz S580 at the Shops at Don Mills on March 15, 2024, at 3:45 p.m.

“Jaiden Robinson then emerged from behind the vehicle, wearing a black hoodie and balaclava, confronted Mr. Shahid-Noorai, and demanded the keys. Mr. Robinson, holding a firearm in his right hand, took the keys by reaching into Mr. Shahid-Noorai’s pocket, entered the Mercedes, and drove off,” said the decision.

“A bystander, Jack Dagleish, in his own vehicle, tried to block Mr. Robinson, who accelerated, struck Mr. Dagleish’s vehicle, and collided with a pole before fleeing. Police tracked the GPS-enabled Mercedes” to an address about nine kilometres away.

Police arrived around 4 p.m. and spotted Robinson by the luxury car’s trunk.

After a foot chase, they arrested him with a semi-automatic handgun that had a round in the chamber.

Robinson, 31, is a Black and Indigenous man.

“During his time at the Toronto South Detention Centre (the South), the Indigenous Unit was eliminated. In September 2025, correctional officers removed and disposed of the artwork, teachings and prayers that were in the former Indigenous range,” Chamberlain said.

“The position of Native Inmate Liaison Officer (NILO) has been and remains vacant, denying Indigenous inmates access to consistent Indigenous support services in the institution.”

Robinson is a “Status First Nations adult with maternal ties to the Carry the Kettle Nakota First Nation,” said the decision.

“His personal history reflects the enduring and well-documented impacts of intergenerational trauma arising from the legacy of residential schools and the colonial policies instituted by successive past governments, resulting in a cultural genocide. His maternal grandmother attended the Lebret Industrial School, and the resulting disruptions have contributed to a loss of cultural identity, fractured parenting models, and exposure to substance use and trauma within the family system.”

His “upbringing was marked by family instability, emotional suppression, and a disconnection from cultural supports and traditions.”

The death of his maternal grandfather when Robinson was 16 “represented a significant turning point in his life,” said the decision. “This loss appears to have intensified feelings of grief and abandonment, contributing to subsequent emotional dysregulation and substance use.”

In early 2024, Robinson “faced multiple concurrent stressors, including bereavements, a serious illness affecting someone close to him, financial instability within his family stemming from the impending foreclosure of his mother’s home, and the abrupt loss of a significant business contract” for his audio engineering business, said the decision.

“The convergence of these events is described as precipitating a ‘tailspin,’ and the temporal proximity between the loss of the contract and the index offence, within days, is particularly striking.”

Robinson, who had past convictions for aggravated assault, theft under $5,000, and robbery, described for the court conditions he was held in at the South.

“He was subjected to frequent and routine institutional lockdowns, amounting to at least 128 full days of continuous 24-hour confinement,” said the decision. “These lockdowns occurred weekly or near weekly and were often attributable to institutional staffing shortages rather than any misconduct by Mr. Robinson.”

The court heard Robinson “was regularly triple bunked, where three individuals are placed in a cell meant for two people, resulting in one inmate being required to sleep on the floor close to the shared toilet.”

After the Indigenous unit was shut down “wall-displayed pieces, including teachings, lessons, prayers, and pictures of Indigenous heroes, were removed and placed in garbage bins” last September, said the decision.

“The officers also took away personal medicine pouches gifted to inmates. Mr. Robinson and other inmates were ultimately given permission to retrieve the art and other displayed items from the garbage. Inmates, including Jaiden Robinson, filed a joint statement to the institution to complain, describing what they felt were deeply offensive and hurtful actions in the disrespectful treatment of their beliefs and culture.”

While both the prosecution and defence recommended the five-year mandatory minimum sentence, they did not agree on how Robinson’s time behind bars should be reduced to reflect “particularly harsh or oppressive” jail conditions during his pre-sentence custody.

Robinson’s “prospects for rehabilitation are promising, as he has shown periods of progress and positive movement, but he does need to address the underlying issues affecting him to manage his choices when challenges become overwhelming,” said the judge.

“Jaiden Robinson has lived his life under the yoke of racism and colonialism. His background reflects a textbook Gladue profile: entrenched intergenerational trauma, compounded childhood abuse and addiction, and systemic disadvantage, alongside clear evidence of resilience and rehabilitative potential when supported through Indigenous-led programming,” Chamberlain said.

“His offending behaviour is best understood as the culmination of these intersecting factors, significantly mitigating culpability and strongly engaging the remedial purpose of Gladue principles.”

Gladue principles stem from a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that require sen­ten­cing judges to con­sider the unique cir­cum­stances of Indi­gen­ous offend­ers to address their overrep­res­ent­a­tion in Canada’s pris­ons. They require judges to take the impact of colonialism, residential schools and intergenerational trauma into account when sentencing Indigenous offenders.

“Chronic lockdowns” and overcrowded jail cells had an impact on Robinson’s mental health, said the judge.

“These conditions in the South, however, pale in comparison to the actions the South took to close the Indigenous range,” Chamblerlain said.

“It meant a limited ability to participate in ceremonies, smudging, and other traditional practices that would otherwise be afforded to inmates.”

What was “particularly galling,” said the judge, “were the actions taken by correctional officers in September of 2025 who removed traditional art, teachings, prayers, and posters of Indigenous heroes that remained on the walls of the former Indigenous range and disposed of them in the trash. They also confiscated medicine pouches that had been previously gifted to Indigenous inmates on those ranges. It is hard to fathom that the teachings and symbols of the Islamic, Jewish, or Christian faiths would have been so casually discarded in a trash bin.”

The South’s “actions against Jaiden Robinson constitute state conduct that falls below acceptable standards of humane detention,” Chamberlain said.

“They reflect a serious pattern of systemic neglect rather than mere isolated deficiencies, after more than a decade of the same excuses for lockdowns, triple bunking, and wanton disregard for the health and welfare of inmates in their fiduciary care. The South and other similar correctional actors have failed to protect and care for inmates. A serious lack of appropriate accommodations for medical, psychiatric, and cultural needs has been the norm.”

The Toronto South Detention Centre “deliberately chose not to follow its own policies protecting the rights of Indigenous inmates,” said the judge.

“For all these reasons, I find that the need to send a message to correctional institutions, in particular the Toronto South Detention Centre, demands that Jaiden Robinson be accorded … credit for the particularly harsh and demeaning conditions under which he was detained,” Chamberlain said.

“In my view, the appropriate reduction for the harsh conditions is 1.7 years.”

The judge also multiplied Robinson’s 809 days spent in jail by 1.5 as a credit for pre-trial custody.

https://archive.ph/NQKqp#selection-3193.0-3519.101

This was close to being another GTA cop funeral.

So close.

Not only was a plainclothes Peel Regional Police officer allegedly shot at multiple times early Sunday morning, sources said, but there were more bullets left in the chamber that were not able to be fired as a result of a hero cop’s move to rescue his at-risk partner.

Witnesses, who said they heard at least three gunshots, also said a Peel cop drove his squad car into the alleged shooter, which effectively ended the threat.

Just in the nick of time.

“We are very fortunate that this situation did not end in tragedy,” said Peel police Deputy Chief Marc Andrews. “The past several weeks have been incredibly difficult for the policing community and incidents of this nature can have a lasting impact on those involved and those who witness them.”

This occurred at 3:29 a.m. on Sunday, when members of Peel’s Strategic Tactical Enforcement Policing (STEP) unit were called after patrol officers noticed a man wearing a mask leaving the Million Dollar Restaurant on Torbram Rd.

Witnesses allegedly that he was seen jumping fences in an attempt to flee. At that point, popular Const. Miguel Bona tried to talk to the man but after no success yelled “police.” After a short foot chase, a source said, the suspect allegedly “turned and discharged multiple rounds in his direction.”

Loaded Glock allegedly recovered

Soon after, a second officer, who sources said was veteran Const. Tyler Satino, arrived in his squad car and “the suspect was located and struck by the vehicle” in which “the firearm fell from his hand.” Sources said police did not return fire during the exchange.

Bona arrested the suspect and a “fully loaded Glock 23, 40-calibre firearm was recovered,” said a witness.

”We are very proud of these officers, who handled themselves in a very dangerous situation … They are heroes,” Andrews said.

Isaiah Bachoo, 24, of Brampton, was arrested and charged with discharging a firearm with intent and possession of a loaded prohibited or restricted firearm. Police said they were also “consulting with the Crown regarding additional and more serious charges.”

“At the time of his arrest, Bachoo was subject to multiple court-ordered firearms prohibitions stemming from previous firearm-related convictions in Thunder Bay in 2023,” police said in a news release, “including a lifetime prohibition from possessing prohibited or restricted firearms, prohibited devices and ammunition, as well as a 10-year prohibition from possessing any firearm.”

Police said the suspect was treated at a hospital for non-life-threatening injuries and released into police custody. They said two officers were treated at the scene for minor injuries.

It is still undetermined how many shots were fired. The scene, which includes several businesses that had no involvement in this incident, was still cordoned off. Sources said the accused is known to police and was charged in a Sept. 6, 2021, shooting,  but those charges were later withdrawn.

In this case, the allegations have not been tested in court. This accused is considered to be innocent until proven guilty in court.

Lucky no one was killed

But they were relieved the officers and the person they arrested were not wounded in what could have easily been something similar to what happened on June 11 in North York, where Toronto Police Const. Marc Pinizzotto was shot as an Emergency Task Force team exercised a search warrant. The alleged shooter, Nicholas Bennett, 19, was also shot by accompanying officers and was recovering in a hospital while facing a first-degree murder charge.

The funeral for Pinizzotto, 43, is set for Wednesday.

A Toronto Police officer last week also found himself pinned by a car on a concrete barrier on the Millwood Rd. bridge. The car was allegedly driven by a 12-year-old boy who was charged with attempted murder.

That followed the June 9 slaying of OPP Const. Tarun Bali, who died after being struck by a car being driven by a man who had allegedly escaped custody from a hospital in Hearst, Ont., where he was detained under the Mental Health Act.

Peel Regional Police Association president Adrian Woolley said that while their members “answer the call without hesitation … courage alone is not enough” and officers need laws that “protect them and the public they serve.

“Today, many officers are questioning whether the job is worth their lives after watching two of their brothers in uniform murdered last week,” he said. “That is the harsh and tragic reality facing policing in Canada. It is a reality that has been created by years of failed policies from the federal Liberal government that have weakened the justice system and emboldened violent offenders.”

This has been a bad month. Two dead cops, two funerals and two more who narrowly escaped the grave.

Four police officers dead or nearly dying in June is terrifying.

jwarmington@postmedia.com

The 14-year-old Pickering teen was obsessed with serial killers and told his gaming friend that unlike his heroes, he wouldn’t get caught.

Thankfully, he was wrong — but not before he took the life of an innocent stranger who was simply outside raking the leaves.

The disturbing details of the agreed statement of facts entered during his guilty plea to first-degree murder in Oshawa were released to the media this week and they tell a horrifying tale of a youth who was a walking timebomb and for weeks had an “urge to kill.” The statement said he even contemplated killing his own grandmother before choosing someone else’s in 83-year-old Eleanor Doney.

After the brutal murder on the afternoon of May 29, 2025, Durham Regional Police obtained CCTV footage from across the street that showed the boy — carrying a briefcase and dressed in a long black coat, black medical face mask and black gloves — stop just before 3 p.m. outside Doney’s home on Lynn Heights Dr., where she was gardening outside.

After they chatted for about two minutes, the statement said the teen returned to his briefcase, retrieved a knife and stabbed the helpless retired teacher in the left side of her neck.

Retired teacher stabbed multiple times

According to the agreed statement, Doney staggered backward, turned and fled toward her house, but the teen killer gave chase and caught up to her in a couple of steps. He stabbed her in the back and then stabbed her in the neck from behind. On the video, she can be heard crying out.

The statement said Doney fell on her back on the sidewalk and the merciless teen bent over her and stabbed her repeatedly in the face. He then grabbed his briefcase and ran eastward down Lynn Heights. At about 3:02 p.m., a passerby saw her and called police.

They arrived nine minutes later and despite efforts at CPR, Doney died a short time later at Sunnybrook hospital.

Court heard a canvas of neighbouring schools soon identified the teen as a student who had been suspended for five days just the day before for bringing a knife to school.

Teen discussed killing in group chat

In a group chat with friends on the day of his suspension, he said he was planning to take a train to Toronto to avoid arrest, would be gone for at least a month and might kill something during that time.

Video surveillance from the area showed that after the killing, he walked into a wooded area near Finch Ave. and Guild Rd. The statement said police later found a knife that tests showed was the one used in the brutal slaying.

A search warrant at his home uncovered a Cuisinart knife set with his fingerprints on the packaging, according to the statement, and one blade missing from the set as well as the clothes he was believed to have been wearing at the time of the murder. Police also seized his computer and phone.

The statement said an examination of his electronic devices showed that in the weeks leading up to the murder, there was a new and increasingly intense interest in sociopathy and psychopathy, serial killers, stabbing, stalking and avoiding detection. There were photos of the intersection of Fairport Rd. and Lynn Heights at 1:38 a.m. on May 16, 2025, about 200 m west of where the homicide occurred. The phone also contained a short video of a steak knife similar to the one used in the murder and the one seized by his school on May 28, 2025.

Court heard he was obsessed with Yoshikage Kira, a suit-wearing businessman who is secretly a serial killer in the popular manga and anime series JoJo’s Bizarre Adventure.

Internet searches included serial killers, stabbing tips

The statement said a Motorola phone seized from his bedroom showed the user surfed the web and social media about serial killers and Yoshikage Kira right up until three minutes before the murder and continued to access YouTube after the slaying, including clips from TV shows Breaking Bad and Family Guy and the movie Iron Man.

According to the agreed statement, his searches included:

— On April 17, 2025, and May 19, 2025, he accessed a video entitled “Is Reverse Grip Good For Stabbing Down?” The video demonstrated how to apply maximum pressure when stabbing someone.

— On May 20 and 21, 2025, he accessed 15 videos about how to tell if you are a psychopath or sociopath.

— On May 22, 2025, he searched “how serial killers got away” on YouTube twice and accessed a four-hour video called “The Most Sadistic Serial Killers of All Time.”

— On May 24, 2025, he accessed six videos about serial killer Ted Bundy.

— On May 26, 2025, he accessed a two-hour-long psychologist video entitled “Psychopath or Sociopath – What you Need to Know.”

— On May 29, 2025, he accessed 18 YouTube videos about Bundy and six videos about stalking. He also repeatedly accessed the GO Transit online schedule. He also accessed an AI version of the Yoshikage Kira character.

The boy, his name protected under the Youth Criminal Justice Act, admitted to the planned and deliberate murder in April and a sentencing hearing is scheduled for next month.

https://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/pickering-teen-pleads-guilty-doney-murder

By Xavier Mesquita Staff Reporter

Two teenagers have been arrested and face multiple charges following a home invasion in a residential Vaughan area.

Police say that at around 4:45 a.m. on May 15, four suspects broke into a home in the area of Stormont Trail and Carling Road, before waking the homeowners and threatening them with a firearm.

“The suspects demanded cash, jewelry and the keys to the victim’s Lamborghini,” York Regional Police said in a news release Wednesday morning. 

The group of suspects then fled the scene in the homeowner’s Lamborghini, along with a “dark-coloured sedan” driven by a fifth suspect, who has not yet been identified, police say.

Investigators identified two of the suspects involved in the home invasion and executed three search warrants in Toronto on June 15, leading to both of their arrests, the news release said. Police added that one of the suspects was found to be in possession of a gun. 

Javaunie Thomas, an 18-year-old from Toronto, faces seven charges including possession of a loaded firearm and possession of property obtained by crime, while a 15-year-old youth faces four charges.

Both individuals were bound by release orders for separate offences at the time of the armed robbery, police said.

Investigators said that three other suspects remain outstanding and urge anyone with information to contact the York Regional Police.

https://archive.ph/ivCH5

https://archive.ph/94DtS

By Peter Edwards Staff Reporter

Hired gunmen in Canada are younger, cheaper, more violent and more plentiful than just a decade ago, organized crime experts say.

“This is ridiculous now,” said Pietro Poletti, a newly-retired, veteran organized crime investigator from Montreal said in an interview. “This is a new phenomenon in Canada.”

His comments come in the wake of the fatal shooting of Constable Marc Pinizzotto, 43, of the Toronto Police Emergency Task Force, Thursday at a highrise apartment complex on Martha Eaton Way in Toronto’s northwest.

Pinizzotto, a married father of two, lost his life while executing a search warrant connected to a ring suspected in the shooting attacks on the U.S. consulate in Toronto and other GTA locations.

Nicholas Bennett, 19, of Toronto will be charged with first-degree murder, police said a news release early Thursday evening. Officers are also searching for another 19-year-old man, Zara Jabbi, in connection with the probe.

Poletti said the Hells Angels and Sicilian Mafia have refrained from hiring teenage gunmen.

“The Hells would hire adults,” Poletti said. “They wouldn’t hire juveniles.”

A longtime GTA organized crime investigator agreed that there has been a dramatic drop in the age, pay and standards of underworld gunmen over the past decade.

The Star is not naming the newly-retired GTA investigator because he is not authorized to speak on behalf of his police force.

Gangs often charge just $1,000 or $1,500 to shoot up a business, hoping to catch on with more established groups.

“I know the street gangs do it,” he said. “That’s all they do.”

Some of them aren’t even old enough to legally drive a car, he said.

“They’re all of 14, 16-years-old,” he said.

They don’t know enough to be much good for police, even if they decided to testify, the former officer said.

“They’re insulated from it,” he said.

Poletti spent his career fighting established adult organized crime groups, including the Mafia empire of the late Vito Rizzuto.

He said he thinks it’s time for law enforcement to treat teenage street gangs as their primary organized crime focus.

“We have to start concentrating on the street gangs,” Poletti said. “They’re going to be a bigger threat for society. It’s out of control.”

“You have to go at them, jabbing them constantly.”

Poletti was the cop who put handcuffs on the late Vito Rizzuto in 2006, when the Mafia boss was flown to the U.S. to unsuccessfully fight charges connected to three gangland slayings in New York.

“We spent 40 years on Vito Rizzuto and he never got arrested on Canadian law,” Poletti said. “We extradited him. We spent millions and millions.”

“They were a different breed, the older ones,” Poletti said. “They respected authority to a certain point.”

Gangs that came after Rizzuto like the United Nations and Wolfpack Alliance don’t agree on hiring outsiders, especially young ones, a former member of the United Nations said.

The Star is not identifying him for safety reasons, as he became a co-operating witness with authorities.

The rival Wolfpack Alliance contracted out for killers, including the murder of Johnny Raposo on a College Street patio in 2012.

Four men were convicted of that murder after hired hit man Dean Michael Wiwchar of Stouffville took off his disguise under a security camera.

“Mistakes are huge, and there’s no room for them when you’re talking murder.”

He said that his old gang, the United Nations, counted on loyalty, and feared hired outsiders would talk with authorities.

“You’re sending guys with no loyalty to you,” he said. “They get caught, they’re telling.”

“We never hired anyone,” he said. “Ever. Never. Anything we did, we did ourselves. None of us were paid a single dollar for anything or any work we ever did.”

“Our circle was tight,” he said. “And our shooter circle was small.”

Poletti said things keep getting worse. He said that even Rizzuto would be mortified by the changes since his arrest 20 years ago.

“It’s going to be a hot summer in Canada,” Poletti said. “It’s going to be crazy.”

By Betsy Powell Courts Reporter

A retired Toronto dermatologist wept quietly and embraced his daughter after a judge acquitted him Tuesday of sexually assaulting five former patients, ruling he was not satisfied that any of the alleged touching amounted to intentional sexual contact.

Paul Adam, 78, was charged with sexual assault in relation to five women who attended his two clinics in Toronto, on Sherbourne Street and Neilson Road, between 1999 and 2023.

During a trial earlier this spring, the complainants testified that the touching was brief and occurred when Adam was leaning in or closely examining them. Four of the women testified that his groin made contact with their knee or leg. One woman said his hand grazed her breast while he examined a lesion on her shoulder.

At the end of the case, the prosecution said the women were credible and gave reliable evidence, while defence lawyers Daniel Brown and Chloe Boubalos argued the complainants had “misinterpreted” accidental contact that occurred during otherwise appropriate medical examinations.

Adam, who took the stand, told Justice Seth Weinstein he may have touched the women as alleged, but that any such contact was incidental and unintended. He testified that his practice routinely involved seeing between 60 and 80 patients per day.

On Tuesday, the judge said that while he found the women credible, there were enough “frailties” in their recollections — and no evidence of intentional misconduct — that “the possibility that any such contact was inadvertent remains both plausible and reasonable,” he said, reading his reasons at downtown’s Ontario Court of Justice.

“I accept that Dr. Adam touched the complainants in a manner that left them feeling uncomfortable. However, considering the evidence on each count and in the context of the evidence as a whole, a reasonable possibility exists that the touching was unintentional,” Weinstein said.

Adam, who had listened to the hour‑long ruling through headphones with his head bowed, began to cry when the judge added he was acquitted on all counts. His daughter left her seat in the public gallery and wrapped her arms around him.

In a statement released hours later by the defence team, Adam said no acquittal can fully undo “the personal, professional, and emotional damage caused by being publicly accused of conduct so completely at odds with who I am and how I have practised medicine.” Adam said he was grateful the evidence was carefully examined, “and that the truth has now been recognized,” and that he will now focus on rebuilding his life and restoring his reputation.

Brown and Boubalos added that the “unfounded allegations” caused enormous damage to a respected physician’s reputation “and unfairly cast a shadow over decades of principled patient care. This verdict marks an important step toward clearing Dr. Adam’s name, and his exoneration comes as no surprise to us or others who know him well.” 

In his 25-page reasons, the judge summarized the women’s evidence and outlined the concerns he had with parts of their testimony. Their identities are covered under a publication ban.

One complainant initially told police that while examining a lesion near her knee, Adam simultaneously pressed his groin into her leg — a position the defence argued was physically impossible. The judge agreed the contact “unlikely occurred in the way she described.” Her estimate of how long the alleged assault lasted also shifted over time: from 30 seconds, then one to two minutes, and by trial, three minutes.

Despite alleging “firm groin contact for an extended period,” she nevertheless then asked him to examine her acne. The judge noted she is suing the doctor and acknowledged that a police report could assist her in that litigation. While that does not make her evidence unreliable, he said, “it is a relevant contextual factor when considered along the other concerns identified.”

Another complainant testified that the groin contact lasted a few seconds, but that his hip also contacted her. “This evidence supports the inference that incidental contact could have occurred as a result of his positioning during the examination.”

She initially said nothing transpired in the dark, but that changed over time. The judge wrote that her “lingering dissatisfaction” with how her complaint to the College of Physicians and Surgeons was handled 25 years ago may have influenced her “present recollection.”

Adam practised medicine in Toronto for approximately 46 years until his resignation in 2024. He was chief of dermatology at St. Michael’s Hospital from 1987 to 2019.

https://archive.ph/xMovK