CALL ME (24/7) 250.320.9258
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 Queen v. W. (L.) 2017

The Queen v. W. (L.) 2017 Client was charged with sexual assault after a woman reported to police that she had awoken to her mother's ex boyfriend on top of her in bed.  The woman's story changed many times in the next month as the police interviewed her again for...

read more

The Queen v. A. (M.) 2017

The Queen v. A. (M.) 2017 A motor vehicle accident occurred in the early morning hours on a ski resort mountain road.  The client was driving a vehicle that rear ended another vehicle at a stop light.  Thankfully the woman and sole occupant of the vehicle that was...

read more


Fill out the form below to receive a free and confidential initial consultation.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Pin It on Pinterest