R. vs. J.L. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual assault; Unlawful Confinement; Assault by Choking.

Issue: Given the impact of the additional evidence that Mr. Johnson provided to Crown counsel, whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.

Result: Crown counsel agreed that the new evidence significantly undermined the strength of the case.  Crown counsel entered a stay of proceedings, bringing the prosecution to an end. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. T.L. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Indecent Act; Mischief (reduced to Peace Bond).

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client intended to commit a criminal offence.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings on the the criminal charges upon our client entering into a Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. P. I. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Assault (reduced to assault).

Issue: Given our client’s mental health issues, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to continue with the sex assaukt prosecution.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to provide information top Crown counsel and to persuade Crown to proceed with a charge of common assault. After hearing Mr. Johnson’s submissions, the court granted our client a conditional discharge. no criminal conviction. no jail, no sex offender registry.

R. vs. B.K. – New Westminster Provincial Court

Charge: Indecent Act.

Issue: Given the rehabilitative steps we were able to guide our client through, whether it was in the public interest to proceed with the prosecution.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter a stay of proceedings upon our client completing an extensive course of counselling. No criminal record.

R. vs. A.A. – North Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Assault; Uttering threats; assault, Breach of Release Order.

Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of conviction.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel that there was no realistic chance of conviction on the sex assault charge and Crown proceeded only on the assault charge to which our client pleaded guilty. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a conditional discharge and Crown entered stays of proceeding on the remaining 3 counts. No jail, no criminal conviction.

R. vs. M.L. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Interference.

Issue: Whether the Crown could prove that our client sexually interfered with his niece.

Result: After a 6 day trial, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade the trial judge that there was reasonable doubt as to the complainant’s credibility and reliability. Not guilty. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. H. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Assault.

Issue: Whether the Crown was able to provide the additional disclosure that Mr. Johnson demanded before proceeding to trial.

Result: In the face of Mr. Johnson’s application, Crown counsel elected to enter a complete stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. M.M. – Courtenay Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Assault (police investigation).

Issue: Whether it was in the public interest to proceed with criminal charges.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade police that it was in the parties’ best interest and not contrary to the public interest to resolve this matter through Restorative Justice. No charges were approved. no criminal record.

R. vs. B.M. – New Westminster Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Assault.

Issue: Whether there was merit in moving forward with the prosecution.

Result: Mr. Johnson was able to provide information to Crown counsel that led to Crown concluding there was no substantial likelihood of a conviction. Stay of proceedings. No jail. No criminal record.

R. vs. D.M. – Burnaby RCMP Investigation

Charges: Sexual Interference; Invitation to Sexual Touching; Assault.

Issue: Whether the evidence would lead to charges being approved.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to guide our client through the police investigation and to ultimately persuade the investigating officer that the evidence of the complaint was not reliable. No criminal charges were approved.

R. vs. N.D. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charges: Invitation to Sexual Touching (x2).

Issues: To what extent the court would consider our client’s remorse and rehabilitation when passing sentence.

Result: Notwithstanding that our client was in a position of trust and the Crown had originally sought a sentence of 12 months jail, Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel and the Court that the appropriate sentence was 90 days, to be served on weekends.

R. vs. A.U. – Vancouver Provincial Court

Charges: Sexual Assault; Assault; Theft Under; Breach of Undertaking.

Issue: Given our client’s circumstances and the circumstances of the allegations, whether it was in the public interest for Crown to proceed with all charges.

Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown counsel to proceed only on the assault charge and to stay proceedings on all other charges. After considering Mr. mines’ submissions, the Court granted our client a conditional discharge and placed him on probation for 12 months. No criminal conviction.