R. v. T., ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE, TORONTO, ONTARIO:

The accused, T., was an entrepreneur who had received a cheque in the amount of $50,000 from a nigerian investor. When he deposited the cheque in his bank account it was revealed that the cheque was a forgery. Mr. Kostman represented T., at trial. He was acquitted on the basis that although the document was a forgery, T., had no criminal intent, to commit a fraud and genuinely believed that the funds were legitimate.


R. v. J.H., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, COLLEGE PARK, TORONTO:

The accused, J.H., was charged with one count of obtaining transportation by fraud. The allegations against her were that she was a passenger in a taxi when she had a fare dispute with the driver. J.H., was said to have been belligerent and aggressive towards the taxi driver who called the police. The police attended and their investigation revealed that J.H., had no ability to pay the taxi driver. Mr. Pyzer represented J.H., and was successful in having the charge against her withdrawn prior to setting a trial in this matter. As such, J.H., does not have a criminal record as a result of these allegations.


R. v. J.P., ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE, OLD CITY HALL, TORONTO:

J.P., was an employee at a pharmacy in Toronto. Her employer received information that J.P., was defrauding the pharmacy by failing to hand in refund slips and debit card refunds. Further investigation revealed that J.P., was crediting these funds to her own bank account at the bank of montreal.

The accused was arrested and investigated by members of the Toronto regional police and gave an inculpatory statement admitting to the accusations against her. As a result, she was charged with fraud under $5,000. Mr. Pyzer represented J.P., and was successful in having the charge against her withdrawn prior to setting a trial date. As such, J.P., does not have a criminal record as a result of this charge.


R. v. C.A. – Fraud over $5,000.00

The accused, C.A., was charged with four separate counts of fraud over $5,000.00. Police spent years investigating C.A. and her co-accused, and the strength of the evidence against C.A. in terms of witnesses and bank statements was substantial. There were hundreds of pages of disclosure and documents, and the paper-trail of evidence against C.A. was significant. The Crown had proof showing sizable amounts of money were allegedly transferred directly into C.A.'s individual bank account, subsequent withdrawals were allegedly made, and cheques were purportedly signed by her. C.A.'s co-accused started several companies, one of which the complainants purportedly purchased shares from. That company, however, was not registered with the Ontario Securities Commission and therefore should not have been selling any shares. There were multiple victims who bought shares in the company. Under the Criminal Code, however, it does not matter if the Crown can ascertain specific victims affected by the alleged fraud. Instead, they must prove there was an actual risk of prejudice to the victim’s economic interest. Once the complainants purchased shares in what they thought was the company, there was a money trail of the funds going directly into C.A.’s personal bank account and not used to invest in the company. The charges against C.A. spanned over a year and a half, but the victims of the alleged fraud claimed they had been frauded by her co-accused as early as ten years prior. C.A. and her co-accused failed to attend the police department to turn themselves in as they had previously arranged, so a warrant was issued for their arrest. If found guilty on one count of fraud over $5,000.00, the convicted accused is automatically exposed to a maximum prison sentence of fourteen-years. C.A. eventually turned herself in to the police department where she was arrested and charged. The Crown was asking the court for a two-year jail sentence. After several months and numerous Crown judicial pre-trials, the night before a week-long preliminary hearing Jonathan Pyzer successfully convinced the Crown to withdraw all four of C.A.’s fraud charges unconditionally with no peace bond upon receiving a signed statutory declaration. Having your charges withdrawn is the best possible outcome when you are charged with fraud over $5,000.00. Jonathan Pyzer recognized the significant impact a criminal record would have on all aspects of C.A.’s life, and vigorously fought for her charges to be withdrawn. If you are charged with fraud, hire a Pyzer Criminal Lawyer to assure yourself you have the best attorneys who are well versed in complex issues concerning the laws of evidence. This is specifically important if you are charged with fraud because there are specific and complex requirements the Crown and police must comply with when they are seeking to introduce business banking records or other documents as evidence at trial.


Tell us about your case
call us mobile icon
Speak to us first: 416-658-1818
arrow-up linkedin facebook pinterest youtube rss twitter instagram facebook-blank rss-blank linkedin-blank pinterest youtube twitter instagram