R. v. A.R. – April 2024

We were appointed counsel after a judge ordered that the self-represented accused was not allowed to cross-examine the complainant. We met with the accused and gathered text messages from him that presented a very different version that what was complained of by the complainant. Our cross examination lasted for the better part of the day and ended with the complainant angrily leaving the courthouse without permission while still under cross examination. The Crown then dropped the charges.