Client was charged with voyeurism, and making and possessing child pornography after it was discovered he set up a covert digital recording system in a bathroom. Mr. Beckett’s negotiations with the Crown allowed the client to avoid the child pornography charges, jail, and having to register as a sex offender. The client received probation. – NO JAIL
Sexual Offences
At Stern Shapray, we provide legal representation across a wide range of criminal and quasi-criminal matters, from serious charges to regulatory and provincial offences.
R. v. K.W.
R. v. F.
Client charged with historical sex offences against a young person (a neighbour and family friend). Client denied the allegations. At trial, Ms. Shamess challenged the complainant on inconsistencies in her evidence and the judge agreed these raised a reasonable doubt, and found the client not guilty.
R. v. O.P.
Client was charged by indictment with committing an indecent act in a public place. The indecent act was captured on a witness’ cellphone video. The Crown initially sought a jail sentence, but Mr. Beckett was able to persuade the Crown to agree to a joint submission for a Conditional Discharge with only one year of probation and which would ultimately leave the client. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. T.C.
Client was charged with 17 counts of indictable sexual assault, sexual interference, and forcible confinement, alleged to have been committed against his wife and step-child on multiple occasions over a period of a decade. Mr. Beckett set the matter down for a preliminary inquiry. At the preliminary inquiry, Mr. Beckett conducted a vigorous and robust cross-examination of the Complainants. Following the preliminary inquiry the Crown was no longer satisfied that there was a good likelihood of conviction and the matter was resolved by way of a peace bond. – NO CONVICTION
R. v. C.W.
Client was charged with one count of indictable sexual assault. The matter proceeded to trial in Supreme Court with a preliminary inquiry prior to trial. Mr. Beckett made successful pre-trial applications for the court’s permission to use the Complainant’s private records at trial. At trial, Mr. Beckett used the private records and the evidence from the preliminary inquiry to challenge the Complainant’s version of events at trial, where he argued for an acquittal. The client was found. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. A. K.
Client was charged with sexual assault against a women he met the same evening. Client denied that the sexual interaction happened. – ACQUITTED
R. v. B.L.
Client charged with sexual assault and indecent act. Defence counsel outlined all weaknesses in Crown’s case to persuade Crown to cease the continuation of the prosecution. As a result of defence counsel’s diligence and trial preparation, all charges were stayed a week before trial was scheduled to commence.
R. v. M.
Client charged with obtain sexual services for consideration from person under age 18. Client was caught in police sting operation and found texting with woman who told him she was under age 18. Client attended hotel with intention to have sex with woman.
Crown was initially seeking jail sentence. Defence counsel, Emily Delaney, negotiated with Crown counsel to agree to the lesser offence which did not include a person under age 18 and client received conditional sentence served in community. – NOT GUILTY
R. v. S. H.
Client charged with sexual interference, sexual assault of someone under age 16, and possession of child pornography. The client met the underage complainant online and engaged in a sexual relationship for several months. The range for sentence for this type of offence is 4-6 years in custody. Ms. Delaney worked with the Crown and ended up making a joint submission for 3 years jail.