R v. Widdifield

R v. Widdifield

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that a common unlawful design to extort and steal from J.H. existed, that Widdifield was probably a participant on directly admissible evidence (senior Club membership, attendance at the boat sale with cash transfer, likely handwriting on bill of sale, and the orchestrated threats and assault on his property), and that considering co‑participants' acts and declarations the Crown proved Widdifield's participation beyond a reasonable doubt; accordingly he was convicted on Counts 1–7.

Citation
2014 BCSC 2482
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Rajinder Singh Sandhu; Accused: Robbie Henry Louis Lajeunesse; Accused: Jeffrey Andrew Benvin; Accused: Robert Frederick Widdifield
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial — Judgment (conviction)
Outcome
Guilty on Counts 1 to 7 of the indictment
Legal Topics
Extortion, Theft, Hearsay Exception — Common Unlawful Design, Joint Enterprise / Common Purpose
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Law Organized Crime Extortion Theft Hearsay Exception — Common Unlawful Design Joint Enterprise / Common Purpose

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Rajinder Singh Sandhu

Accused

Robbie Henry Louis Lajeunesse

Accused

Jeffrey Andrew Benvin

Accused

Robert Frederick Widdifield

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial — Judgment (conviction)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a common unlawful design existed
  2. 2 Whether hearsay of co‑participants is admissible under the common design exception
  3. 3 Whether Widdifield was probably a participant based on direct evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that a common unlawful design to extort and steal from J.H. existed, that Widdifield was probably a participant on directly admissible evidence (senior Club membership, attendance at the boat sale with cash transfer, likely handwriting on bill of sale, and the orchestrated threats and assault on his property), and that considering co‑participants' acts and declarations the Crown proved Widdifield's participation beyond a reasonable doubt; accordingly he was convicted on Counts 1–7.

Court Disposition

Guilty on Counts 1 to 7 of the indictment

Orders

  • Conviction entered: guilty on Counts 1 to 7
  • Restriction on publication pursuant to 486.5(1) C.C.C.