Man cleared of arson for lack of evidence - Arson Criminal Defence Lawyer Ottawa

Date: 31 Oct 1985
By Jane Taber
and John Kessel
Citizen staff writers

A district court jury took less than five minutes Wednesday to acquit a 19-year-old man of arson nearly 18 months after he first was accused of setting a fire that caused less than $18 damage. The acquittal came after Assistant Crown Attorney Brian Lennox told the jury he wouldn't be calling any evidence against Charles Pereira because two statements made by the accused were ruled inadmissible and expert testimony fell through. Pereira was charged with arson and setting a fire by negligence after a small fire in June 1984 at a $300,000 townhouse construction site. A general laborer at the site, Pereira also was responsible for keeping an eye on the area at night. At issue was whether Pereira had set fire to a small piece of particle board that formed part of the outer wall of the townhouse development. Following a preliminary hearing in December a provincial court judge ruled there was sufficient evidence to commit Pereira to trial. The judge allowed into evidence two statements Pereira had given police. Mondai, Lennox and defence lawyer Gary Chayko spent half a day picking a jury, but Tuesday, during a voir dire - a trial within a trial at which the jury is not present - district court Judge Edward Houston ruled the two statements inadmissible. Pereira had told police he checked the site at 4 a.m. on June 11, 1984. He said when he went back 20 minutes later he saw the fire and put it out with some sand. However, he did not inform his boss, the police or the fire department until about seven hours later. In both statements he told police he didn't report it immediately because he was scared. Houston ruled the first statement inadmissible because there was an insufficient record of what had occurred when he made it. There were contradictions between what police heard and what an independent witness heard. The other statement, made while Pereira was in a police car, was not allowed in because the judge ruled he was being detained and police had not told him his right to call a lawyer as guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Lennox still thought he had a case until expert evidence on how long the fire had been burning and whether it could have been lit by Pereira fell through. After private consultations between the lawyers and the judge, the jury was called in to court and Lennox told them he did not have sufficient evidence to proceed. Houston told the jurors that in light of the Crown's comments, "the only thing you can do . . . is find the accused not guilty."