Downeycase

[230] Defence suggested that the evidence does not sufficiently identify the accused to be associated with the pink iPhone and with the phone number 613-804—-. I respectfully disagree. I find that this was phone was used by the accused for the following reasons: one, the complainants observed the accused with the pink iPhone associated with 613-804—-; two, the pink iPhone was identified by M.M. and located 15 feet away from where the accused was seated before his arrest; neither the video shown nor any police witness or M.M. identified a person named Jamie being at the Marriot that day; and three, an analysis of the phone data shows that the accused sent and received messages from this phone. Some examples are set out below. [231] The police did a search of the web history of the pink iPhone associated with phone 613- 804———. When they searched the word “escort”, they found received messages saying, “Hello Preston my name is Michelle” or sent messages saying, “Hello its Preston texting about the spa job touchtherapy.ca.” These pieces of evidence support a finding that this phone was used by the accused who commonly went by the name of Preston. (Superior Court of Justice of Ontario) also forgot that the Ottawa crown and Ottawa police told her that they couldn’t get into the pink iPhone to analyze it’s data. -No mention that Officer F said the pink iPhone was with MM. - no mention that there were times the phones travelled in different directions at the same time Superior Court of Justice of Ontario https://m.youtube.com/@systemicracism5094

in this case these witnesses were considered “very reliable and credible” Worst Human Trafficking Cases in Canada - Convictions Pt2 Judge failed to mention this in her reasons of judgment- 36. ​P.C. also gave statements under oath to the police on April 5 and 30. At the time, she was under arrest and was in jeopardy in regard to her immigration status and at risk of deportation. She had a specific term on her entry to Canada that she could not work in the sex industry. She acknowledged she had a serious legal problem. (May 21, pp. 75 – 79). In her April 30th statement she stated: “I can tell you the whole story” but “what do I get for it?”. She explained that she wanted to know if she could be saved from deportation and not finishing school: “it depends on how I answer the question how it’ll affect me. I’m just trying to protect myself.” (May 21, pp. 81, 82). She went on at various points to acknowledge that she withheld information in her statements to the police, that she outright lied over and over numerous times and intentionally mislead them. At one point she said: In my mind, if you ask the same question twice, it’s because I’m saying the wrong thing, so I have to change it. She said she was getting deported so it didn’t matter if she lied or mislead the police. (May 25, pp. 49, 51,52, 54, 55, 65, May 28, p. 36, 46, 57, 58, 65) — The Ottawa Police tried to analyze a Pink iphone that was involved In the Downey case. The Detectives and the crown told the Ontario superior court judge three times that they could not get into the pink Iphone. These were her findings.. [230] Defence suggested that the evidence does not sufficiently identify the accused to be associated with the pink iPhone and with the phone number 613-804—-. I respectfully disagree. I find that this was phone was used by the accused for the following reasons: one, the complainants observed the accused with the pink iPhone associated with 613-804—-; two, the pink iPhone was identified by M.M. and located 15 feet away from where the accused was seated before his arrest; neither the video shown nor any police witness or M.M. identified a person named Jamie being at the Marriot that day; and three, an analysis of the phone data shows that the accused sent and received messages from this phone. Some examples are set out below. [231] The police did a search of the web history of the pink iPhone associated with phone 613- 804———. When they searched the word “escort”, they found received messages saying, “Hello Preston my name is Michelle” or sent messages saying, “Hello its Preston texting about the spa job touchtherapy.ca.” These pieces of evidence support a finding that this phone was used by the accused who commonly went by the name of Preston. (Superior Court of Justice of Ontario) also forgot that the Ottawa crown and Ottawa police told her that they couldn’t get into the pink iPhone to analyze it’s data. -No mention that Officer F said the pink iPhone was with MM. - no mention that there were times where a pink iPhone and downeys black phones travelled in different directions at the same time Superior Court of Justice of Ontario ignored facts - 17.​It is respectfully submitted that the evidence of M.M. should be largely rejected as she had little if any respect for the truth and it would be dangerous to convict based on anything she said. She was bombastic giving her testimony, contradictory, she often did not answer questions put to her, she pretended not to understand questions, she gave long winded answers not responsive to the question being asked, she was unrealistic in her denials of suggestions made to her and made artificial distinctions between her personal relationship with the accused and her business relationship. 28.​In Windsor, she wasn’t looking to strip, it was to escort (June 7, p. 19). 29.​She claimed she never did anything without asking permission of the accused. It was just a respect boundary between them (June 10, p. 34). It is submitted that her testimony demonstrates that she was not being controlled. 102 F. The accused did not physically make her stay, only mentally. She claimed to be stuck there or she would have nothing (June 11, p. 27). She stated to the police in her statement of April 18 referring to the agency: There would be financial abuse as a consequence if I didn’t do something. The agency is not mean to you but the fridge should be full … They don’t treat you bad. Honestly you can leave whenever you want. Girls are not in danger. They’re not drugged. It’s more like a cheap black guy co-ordinating your life for you. … I’m a smart business woman. (June 11,p. 54). We are not chained and shackled. We’re not lured. It’s exploitation of the money. I couldn’t care less about the assaults or what other girls did. The whole issue is the money and I don’t have the money. You can leave whenever you want but not with the money (June 11, p. 57). g.​She signed up to be an escort. She wanted to escort. It meant good money (June 11, p. 62). 35.​She testified that 3 days into the Spa, she had been keeping her money. She said she lied to the accused and said she had none (June 8, p. 28, ll. 20 – 25). 36.​She subsequently denied that she had testified that she had lied to the accused. Then she would not answer if she had memory problems, she refused to answer and pretended not to understand the question (June 10, pp. 106, 107, 110). 37.​She continued to refuse to admit she had lied to the accused about having no money. She said she would not answer without seeing the evidence. The recording of her evidence was played back. Then she tried to explain she only lied to the accused about not being in possession of the money but that it was clear she had the money and didn’t lie about it. (June 11, pp. 2-7, 9). 38.​She then went further and said that it was her “private call” that she was sent “from the agency” and therefore it was her money and she did not have to give it to the accused. It is submitted that this contradicts her entire evidence that she always had to turn over her money (June 11, p. 8). And in one text message she asked the accused tom come pick up the $140 and the accused replied: no, that`s your money. 51.​She maintained that the air mattress was the only thing she had “the whole time” (June 8, p. 9). She emphasized how it could be seen in the ads and videos (June 8, p. 9). She repeated in cross examination about being stuck on the mattress with no change (June 14, p. 24, Exhibit 32 photo). In cross examination she said she had forgotten that she had received 2 new mattresses by November 29, 2018 (August 5, pp. 96, 99) 60.​She testified she worked 24/7 and did more calls than the others (June 7, p. 103). It is to be noted that during police surveillance, one or two persons were seen leaving Uplands and it was not confirmed the reason for their presence. This absence of traffic does not corroborate MMs evidence or any other complainant to be working non- stop 24/7. 60.​She testified she worked 24/7 and did more calls than the others (June 7, p. 103). It is to be noted that during police surveillance, one or two persons were seen leaving Uplands and it was not confirmed the reason for their presence. This absence of traffic does not corroborate MMs’ evidence or any other complainant to be working non- stop 24/7. 61.​She got the most expensive ring because she made the most money (June 19, p. 6). 62.​She made so much money, the accused treated her different. She could worm her way around to get things she needed. The accused treated her better than the other girls (June 10, p. 34). 63.​All Queen and Trinity did was pout because they couldn’t sit and have sxx with the accused. Meanwhile she was working like a dog 24/7 (June 10, p. 44, ll. 20-25)

[230] Defence suggested that the evidence does not sufficiently identify the accused to be associated with the pink iPhone and with the phone number 613-804—-. I respectfully disagree. I find that this was phone was used by the accused for the following reasons: one, the complainants observed the accused with the pink iPhone associated with 613-804—-; two, the pink iPhone was identified by M.M. and located 15 feet away from where the accused was seated before his arrest; neither the video shown nor any police witness or M.M. identified a person named Jamie being at the Marriot that day; and three, an analysis of the phone data shows that the accused sent and received messages from this phone. Some examples are set out below. [231] The police did a search of the web history of the pink iPhone associated with phone 613- 804———. When they searched the word “escort”, they found received messages saying, “Hello Preston my name is Michelle” or sent messages saying, “Hello its Preston texting about the spa job touchtherapy.ca.” These pieces of evidence support a finding that this phone was used by the accused who commonly went by the name of Preston. (Superior Court of Justice of Ontario) also forgot that the Ottawa crown and Ottawa police told her that they couldn’t get into the pink iPhone to analyze it’s data. -No mention that Officer F said the pink iPhone was with MM. - no mention that there were times the phones travelled in different directions at the same time Superior Court of Justice of Ontario https://m.youtube.com/@systemicracism5094