• False Creek at night

Our Successes

Sexual Offences

R. vs. I.R. – Squamish RCMP Investigation

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether the complainant had, in fact, consented and whether it was reasonable for police to recommend charges.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation without any police detention or arrest. No charges were recommended to Crown counsel. No criminal record.

R. vs. J.L. – Coquitlam RCMP Investigation

Charge: Sexual Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether the Crown would be able to prove that our client did not take reasonable steps to learn the age of the complainant.
Result: Mr. Mines made representations to the investigating officer suggesting that, in the circumstances, it was reasonable for our client to have concluded that the complainant was of legal age and did, in fact, consent to all sexual contact. No charge was forwarded to Crown. No criminal record.

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

Charge: Sex Assault; Sexual Interference.
Issue: Whether the Crown could prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt in this 5 day trial that involved numerous issues including the admissibility of hearsay statements, the reliability of witness statements, and whether there was an innocent explanation for the presence of our client’s DNA on the clothing of the complainant.
Result: Upon considering Mr. Mines’ submissions, the trial judge found our client not guilty and dismissed both charges. Our client avoided a mandatory minimum one year jail sentence. No criminal record.

R. vs. A.S. – Port Coquitlam Provincial Court

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the investigation and provided information to Crown counsel which contributed to Crown deciding to not approve any criminal charge in this matter.

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

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether our client had a reasonable and honest belief that the complainant had consented to the sexual activity.
Result: On the fourth day of trial, after Mr. Johnson had vigorously cross examined the complainant, the Crown entered a stay of proceedings on the criminal charges and our client entered into a Peace Bond. No criminal record.

R. vs. K.G. – Vancouver Police Investigation

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the investigation which ended with police recommending no chargesl. No criminal record.

R. vs. N.D. – Vancouver Supreme Court

Charge: Sexual Assault; Break and Entering.
Issue: Whether, given the loss of crucial evidence by police, our client could receive a fair trial.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel that our client’s right to a fair trial was breached. Crown entered a stay of proceedings. No criminal record.

R. vs. R.K. – Surrey RCMP Investigation

Charge: Possession of Child Pornography.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence to proceed with a criminal charge.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which ended with police concluding that our client did not knowingly possess any illegal images. No charges recommended. No criminal record. All seized property was returned to our client.

R. vs. G.H. – Ridge Meadows RCMP Investigation

Charge: Sexual Assault.
Issue: Whether there was a substantial likelihood of a conviction with respect to this historical sex assault complaint.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to steer our client through the police investigation which concluded with police not recommending any charges. No criminal record.

R. vs. I.N. – West Vancouver Police investigation

Charge: Sex Assault.
Issue: Whether there was sufficient evidence against our client to recommend a charge.
Result: Mr. Johnson was able to steer our client through the police investgation which concluded with no charges being recommended. No criminal record.

R. vs. V.C. – Surrey Provincial Court

Charge: Sexual Interference; Sexual Assault.
Issue: In the circumstances of this historic “breach of trust” sexual interference against a minor, whether our client would be sentenced to jail.
Result: Mr. Mines was able to persuade Crown that there was strong proof of only one incident of sexual misconduct. After hearing Mr. Mines’ submissions, the court granted our client a 12 month conditional sentence followed by 18 months probation.

R. vs. N.D. – British Columbia Supreme Court

Charge: Breach of Recognizance (x4) re: Sex Assault case.
Issue: Given potential defences raised by Mr. Johnson, whether it was in the public interest for Crown counsel to proceed.
Result: Just prior to the start of this three day Supreme Court trial, Mr. Johnson was able to persuade Crown counsel to enter stays of proceeedings on all four charges. No criminal record.