Erec Rolfe, Defence Lawyer
Erec Rolfe, Defence Lawyer

R. v. P.H. - Client acquitted of assaulting police, threatening death, in post G20 incident.

Charges:  Assault with intent to resist arrest, threaten death, threaten mischief to police property

Result: Client acquitted on all counts


P.H. was injured by police in an altercation that occured one week after the G20 summit in Toronto.  P.H. had a verbal altercation with police, following which, he walked away.  Minutes later, he was approached by different officers.  The trial was about what happened during this second encounter with police.


The prosecution alleged that P.H. had threatened police in the initial dispute.  The second group of officers had approached him to effect an arrest.  P.H. was beaten to the point of having a black eye, bruised face, and fractured nose.  He was charged with assaulting police with the intent to resist arrest.


Mr. Rolfe systematically broke down the prosecution's case, piece by piece.  He successfully argued that the notes of two senior officers regarding the initital "threats" rendered it likely that collusion had occured.  In particular, the officers' notes were so similar that they could not have been independently written.  Further, Mr. Rolfe raised doubt that the second group of officers had accurately portrayed what happened in the physical altercation.  The trial judge found that what actually happened was an "unprovoked attack" on P.H.


He was acquitted of all counts.  You can read the decision here.

R v. L.L. - Client acquitted after police line-up shown to be flawed

Charge: Assault causing bodily harm

Result: Client acquitted after trial


L.L. was charged with assault causing bodily harm.  The victim was assaulted by unknown assailants.  The police conducted a photo line-up with the victim.  Upon seeing L.L.'s photo, the victim immediately stated that he was "100 per cent sure" that L.L. was the culprit.  


However, Mr. Rolfe demonstrated to the court that the police failed conduct a proper line-up.  The line-up was created in a manner that led the victim to unfairly focus on L.L.  Despite the vicitim's "100 per cent" confidence in his identification of L.L., he was acquitted of all charges.

R. v. J.M. - Former boxer acquitted of judo-chopping complainant

Charges:  Assault, threaten death

Result: Client acquitted on all counts


J.M. was a former boxer whose last bout in the ring was in the 1960s.  However, he maintained a place in the boxing world, coaching and teaching at a local gym.  J.M. candidly admitted to having a lot of experience street-fighting.  He testified that he only fought in one style: boxing.  He testified further that his dominant hand was right, and he only ever used his left hand for one thing: a left hook.


The prosecution alleged that J.M.  judo-chopped his roommate with his left hand.  Mr. Rolfe successfully argued that J.M. was proud of his boxing skills and and would never judo-chop in a fight.  The trial judge agreed, acquitting J.M. on all counts.

R. v. T.R. - Client acquitted after trial on domestic assault charges

Charges:  Assault X 2 (domestic), uttering threats, mischief

Result: Client acquitted on all counts following trial


The prosecution alleged that T.R. assaulted his girlfriend at two locations, threatened her and damaged the home.  After the trial, T.R. was acquitted on all counts.

R. v. A.G. - Client acquitted after trial following major inconsistencies in evidence

Charges:  Assault (domestic)

Result: Client acquitted following trial


The prosecution alleged that A.G. assaulted his boyfriend over the course of hours.  However, Mr. Rolfe successfully cross-examined the complainant, revealing material inconsistencies in his evidence.  A.G. was acquitted by the trial judge.

Print Print | Sitemap
© Erec Rolfe Defence Law