The Queen v. M. (W.) 2017
Client was charged with making and possessing child pornography after the police executed a warrant at his house and found pictures on his computer and on digital storage devices that contained images of a day at the beach and on the boat that depicted a few of the kids of family friends skinny dipping in the lake and “horsing around” on the beach naked (while the kid’s parent was present on the beach as well). The defence planned to argue that the images did not even come close to meeting the definition of child pornography in the Criminal Code, however before that argument was made the defence argued that the search warrant was invalid on the basis that the affiant (the police officer who drafted and swore the affidavit in support of the warrant) had failed to make full and frank disclosure of all material facts in his affidavit. The trial judge agreed with Mr. van der Walle and ruled the warrant invalid and ruled that all the images were inadmissable in evidence. Not guilty of all charges. Client did not testify.
Related Stories
The King v. C.(R.) 2024
The police began investigating the client after a woman reported to them that two men had come to the door looking for her son. The woman explained that the men had told her son that he owed money from a drug debt and that he would be hurt if he did not pay. When...
The King v. T.(R.) 2024
Police were conducting a surveillance operation on the client and many other members of a suspected drug trafficking group in Vernon, Armstrong, and Enderby. The client was well known to police as he had a lengthy criminal record including no less than 7 prior...
The King v. S.(M.) 2024
A semi truck driver was cruising on the highway just outside of Revelstoke when another vehicle pulled out to pass him on a double solid line. While executing the pass, the other vehicle ended up clipping the semi as it tried to pull back into its lane which resulted...