Ontario Criminal

Breaking and entering

Accused intended to commit theft of item which piqued his sexual curiosity

Accused was charged with break and enter with intent. Complainants had hired accused to fix some windows in their house and shortly thereafter some personal items including vibrator went missing and accused had key. Complainants subsequently installed cameras in their house and told accused they would be away next day when accused no longer had key from them. Accused was caught on camera holding pair of underwear in bedroom of complainant on day in question when everyone was away. Accused testified he had no criminal intent and thought he had consent to enter home and was only satisfying his sexual curiosity. Accused found guilty. Court was satisfied that accused intended to commit serious crime when he entered home of complainant. Accused intended to commit theft of some item which piqued his sexual curiosity as he put it in his testimony as court reasoned he intended to keep trophy from his exploits. Court did not believe accused as it was clear that accused did not have permission to enter home on day in question.

R. v. L. (W.) (Mar. 18, 2014, Ont. S.C.J., Conlan J., File No. CR13-110) 112 W.C.B. (2d) 222.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

Law Times reports that there is no explicit rule that lawyers in Ontario must be competent in the use of technology. Do you think there should be explicit rules spelling out the expectations of lawyers’ in terms of tech use in their practice?