Her Majesty the Queen - v. -, 2018 SKPC 17

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF SASKATCHEWAN Citation: 2018 SKPC 017 Date: March 7, 2018 Information: 35710075 Location: Saskatoon _____________________________________________________________________________ Between: Her Majesty the Queen - and - Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas Appearing: M. Kujawa For the Crown J. Buydens For the Accused JUDGMENT D.C. SCOTT , J [ 1 ] The accused Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas is charged that on October 19, 2016 in Saskatoon she: 1. Operated a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner contrary to s. 249(1) (

a) of the Criminal Code ; 2. Operated a motor vehicle in order to evade a police officer contrary to s. 249.1(1) of the Criminal Code ;

3. Wilfully obstructed Cst. Noesgaard by providing a false name and date of birth, contrary to s. 129(1) of the Criminal Code ; 4. Failed to comply with a condition of a probation order that she keep the peace and be of good behavior, contrary to s. 733.1(1) of the Criminal Code ; 5. Failed to comply with a condition of an undertaking that she keep the peace and be of good behavior, contrary to s. 145(3) of the Criminal Code .

Background [ 2 ] On October 19, 2016, a silver-grey 2010 Chevrolet Impala (Impala), which was of interest to the special investigations unit of the Saskatoon Police Service (SPS), was being covertly surveilled by a number of plain-clothes officers in unmarked vehicles. At one point, Sgt. Amyotte, who was on patrol in a marked police car was asked by the special investigations unit, to conduct a traffic stop of the Impala in the Caswell Hill area. [ 3 ] The Impala did not stop for Sgt.

Amyotte’s emergency lights and siren; rather it was driven at high speed, disobeying stop signs and at one point crossing into oncoming traffic. Sgt. Amyotte did not see the driver or occupants of the vehicle during his pursuit. [ 4 ] Cst. Taylor and Cst. Pozniak, each in different unmarked vehicles, observed the Impala as it drove past them at different times and in different locations. [ 5 ] The police lost sight of the Impala, during which time it was allegedly abandoned by its occupants.

Two individuals, Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas and Zane Crowe, believed to have been the occupants of the vehicle, were seen on foot in a nearby park. They entered a red Dodge Dakota truck which pulled up to them. Officers later stopped the truck and arrested Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas and Zane Crowe. [ 6 ] At detention, Zane Crowe informed the police that Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas was the operator of the vehicle and directed officers to the Impala’s location. [ 7 ] Certain items in the Impala were seized pursuant to a search warrant, including an ashtray with the name “Shaylin” on it and jeans with the accused’s DNA. [ 8 ] Downloaded recordings of telephone calls made by Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas from Pine Grove Correctional Centre (Pine Grove) while she was on remand were introduced into evidence at trial. [ 9 ] The sole issue in this case is whether the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused Shaylin Sutherland- Kayseas was the operator of the Impala at the time it was driven in a dangerous and evasive manner. Evidence Sgt. Dale Amyotte [ 10 ] Sgt. Amyotte testified he was asked by the special investigations unit to conduct a traffic stop of the Impala. He located the vehicle eastbound on 23 rd Street and pulled in behind it.

The Impala ’ s driver failed to stop at a stop sign. The officer activated his emergency lights and siren in the area of Avenue I and 22 nd Street. The driver of the Impala disobeyed another stop sign

and proceeded westbound on 22 nd Street, accelerating rapidly. The officer called other units in the area for assistance. The Impala continued to accelerate, travelling as fast as 147 km per hour in a 50 km per hour zone. The Impala crossed 22 nd Street, a major thoroughfare, and drove into oncoming traffic without reducing its speed. The vehicle disobeyed a further stop sign at Avenue V and 21 st Street. Eventually, a decision was made to terminate the pursuit for safety reasons. [ 11 ] At no time did Sgt. Amyotte see who was driving the Impala. Neither was he certain of the number of occupants in the vehicle.

An in-car video from Sgt. Amyotte’s vehicle was tendered as Exhibit P-1 by the Crown, which confirmed the officer’s testimony regarding the pursuit. Cst. Robbie Taylor [ 12 ] On October 19, 2016, Cst. Taylor was working with the special investigations unit. He and other officers were to locate a 2010 silver Chevrolet Impala with the licence plate 273 KFE. [ 13 ] Cst. Taylor was parked facing north in an alley running parallel to 22 nd Street, which runs east – west. During this time, the officer was operating radios and on the phone.

At 2:33 p.m., the Impala came through the alley from the east and turned north onto Avenue H. The vehicle passed in front of the officer within 30 feet at approximately 20 km per hour. Cst. Taylor had a momentary view, approximately two seconds in duration, of the Impala ’ s driver ’ s side. [ 14 ] Cst. Taylor described the driver as a Native female with her hair pulled back in a ponytail. Another person in the vehicle was believed to be a male. The officer did not know these individuals. Cst. Taylor’s role was to maintain continuity with the Impala and identify the people in it, but not to stop it. Cst.

Gregory Pozniak [ 15 ] Cst Pozniak was on plain-clothes duty on October 19, 2016, to assist the surveillance unit. In the morning briefing, he and other members received information, including a photograph of the accused, Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas, in relation to an investigation. He had not dealt with Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas before and could not recall anything distinguishing about her photograph other than that she appeared to be a Native female in her early 20's. [ 16 ] At 2:50 p.m., Cst. Pozniak joined the surveillance team involved in following the Impala.

At 2:56 p.m., the Impala turned onto Avenue K, driving south directly toward Cst. Pozniak’s parked vehicle. [ 17 ] Cst. Pozniak saw two people in the vehicle. A Native female with long, dark straight hair was in the driver’s seat. She appeared to be of slimmer build and taller than her male passenger. She was wearing dark clothes. Based upon the photograph he had seen earlier that day, the officer believed the female to be Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas, although he acknowledged that previously viewing the photograph of Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas may have influenced his belief. [ 18 ] A male, of either Native or Caucasian descent, was seated in the passenger seat. He appeared to be scruffy or unshaven. [ 19 ] Cst. Pozniak was approximately 10 feet from the Impala as it passed at its closest point. He estimated its speed as being between 40 and 50 km per hour. He observed the driver for 5 to 10 seconds until the vehicle passed him.

He was able to see the front of her face and her side profile as she drove by. [ 20 ] The officer did not follow, but heard on the radio that the vehicle was last seen as it turned on Avenue V southbound near 20 th Street. He drove to that location.

[ 21 ] At 3:04 p.m. while driving near the 400 block of Avenue U, Cst. Pozniak saw the same two individuals he had seen in the silver car, as they were walking through a park. At that point, he was approximately 20 to 30 feet from them. The officer watched the pair as a red Dodge Dakota vehicle stopped to pick them up. They entered the back seat of the truck, which then drove away. The Dodge Dakota was stopped by police near Avenue H and 20 th Street. [ 22 ] Within minutes, Cst. Pozniak arrived at that scene to see a male walking away from the truck.

He believed this to be the male who had been driving the red Dodge Dakota. The male had a “grenade” tattoo on the side of his neck. Coincidentally, Cst, Pozniak saw the same male with the same tattoo at the court house the next day. The officer talked to him and determined he was Harley Crowe. Cst. Kai Noesgaard [ 23 ] Cst. Noesgaard testified that on October 19, 2016, he was in the area of Avenue H and 20 th Street at approximately 2:30 p.m. to assist with a traffic stop of a red Dodge Dakota. At 3:30 p.m., he pulled up behind the truck. The driver was not in the truck but four others were.

Two of the four provided a false name. Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas gave the name of Credence Sutherland and Zane Crowe gave the name of Devon Spokes. [ 24 ] As the officer handcuffed Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas, Zane Crowe jumped out of the back seat of the truck and tried to run away. He was tackled to the ground and became injured. [ 25 ] At detention, Zane Crowe informed the officer that Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas had been driving the vehicle pursued by the police and agreed to show them where the vehicle had been abandoned. Sgt. Neilson Lund [ 26 ] Sgt.

Lund was working in the major crimes unit of the SPS in October 2016, involved in a homicide investigation. Their suspect was the accused Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas. [ 27 ] On October 19, 2016, Zane Crowe directed Sgt. Lund and other officers to the location of the Impala. The vehicle was found in a lane between Avenue U and Avenue V near 18 th Street. [ 28 ] Although the officer referred to Zane Crowe as a suspect during his testimony, the officer explained he had not been considered a suspect in relation to the high-speed pursuit, based upon Sgt. Taylor’s belief that the driver was a female and Cst.

Pozniak’s identification of the driver as Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas. [ 29 ] Zane Crowe told the officer that the driver of the vehicle was the person with whom he had been arrested, referring to her as “Linshay” Sutherland. The officer noted “Linshay” was a variation of “Shaylin”. Zane Crowe [ 30 ] Zane Crowe testified that on October 19, 2016, his cousin, Harley Crowe picked him up at Zane ’ s sister ’ s place in a black or brown truck. They met a woman with whom Harley had some business. According to Zane Crowe, the woman was the accused.

There was not enough room in Harley ’ s truck so Zane was told to go with the accused Only Zane and the accused left in her car.

[ 31 ] Zane recalled that as they turned a corner, they saw the police, so drove down 22 nd Street at a high rate of speed. He testified he was frightened during the police chase, concerned they might be involved an accident. At the McDonald ’ s they turned left, veered onto 20 th Street, and parked the car. [ 32 ] They called Harley who picked them up in his truck. Zane and the accused got into Harley’s vehicle and were followed by unmarked police vehicles. Harley’s truck was stopped by the police and Harley left.

Zane and the accused were arrested. [ 33 ] At the police station, Zane pointed out the accused as the person who had been driving. He went with two police officers to show them where the Impala was situated. [ 34 ] At trial, Zane acknowledged he had lied to the police when he was arrested, providing them with a false name. He had also tried to run away, sustaining injuries to his arm at the time of his arrest. Later, he was taken to the hospital by police. [ 35 ] Zane did not know the accused prior to these events.

He identified the accused in the prisoner’s box as the driver, referring to her as “Corrina Suther”. He described her vehicle as white, possibly an Escalade or Mercedes, but admitted he was uncertain about the make. [ 36 ] Zane testified that he was not the driver of the Impala. He admitted that on the day in question, he had taken “a lot” of drugs, including six milligrams of dilaudid and 20 units or syringes of crystal methamphetamine. He described himself as “pretty high” but denied his condition affected his memory. Cst. Kerishia Bird [ 37 ] Cst.

Bird was on general patrol duty on October 19, 2016, when she learned that assistance was needed transporting individuals to detention. She went to Avenue H and 20 th Street where she was asked to place a female in the back of her patrol car to wait for further instruction. The female provided the name of Credence Dene Lynn Sutherland. The officer searched their system and CPIC and determined the name was incorrect. The female was in fact Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas also associated with the names “ Dene Lynn ” and “ Credence ” . The system referenced tattoos on the right wrist and left hand.

The officer asked to see the accused ’ s wrist at detention, at which time the accused admitted she had used a false name. Sgt. Mikael Ziola [ 38 ] On October 21, 2016, Sgt. Ziola worked the forensic identification

section of the SPS and was the exhibit control officer executing search warrants in relation to a Chevrolet Impala licence plate number 273 KFE and a red Dodge Dakota truck. A number of items were seized from the Impala. In particular, a black garbage bag was located inside the trunk. Its contents included a pair of jeans and a balled up piece of grey duct tape. Found in the front passenger area was a black plastic portable ashtray with the name “ Shaylin ” on it. [ 39 ] The jeans and duct tape were submitted for DNA testing.

A Forensic Science and Identification Services Laboratory Report was admitted as Exhibit P-3 by consent of the Crown and defence. The DNA profile was identified as that of Shaylin Katrina Sutherland-Kayseas. A warrant authorized the taking of bodily substances from the accused for comparison. It was determined that the seized jeans contained Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas’s DNA. [ 40 ] A key fob for the Impala was seized from the Dodge Dakota truck’s glove box. No fingerprints were taken from the key fob found in the Dodge Dakota’s glove box.

Sgt. Brent Grabowski [ 41 ] Sgt. Grabowski testified that on November 16, 2016, December 16, 2016, January 31, 2017 and April 20, 2017 he obtained production orders for recordings of telephone calls made by the accused from Pine Grove Correctional Centre to individuals outside the institution. He received a disc with recordings of the calls and a password from Rick Davis of the Ministry of Justice. [ 42 ] After reviewing the telephone calls from the first and second production orders, it became apparent that calls were missing.

The police sought information from Pine Grove regarding telephone calls made by other inmates to numbers that had been frequently called by the accused within a specific period of time. One of those inmates was Chelsey Cook. As a result, calls from her account were also accessed. [ 43 ] The officer testified that under the Telmate system, each inmate in Pine Grove is assigned an inmate telephone number, identified using voice recognition. However, he acknowledged there was no way to be certain who actually made the calls. In this case, the accused could have made calls from her own account or someone else’s.

Similarly, someone other than the accused could have used her account. He testified 11 different people called the same numbers as did the accused. For greater certainty, the calls’ contents were analyzed for consistency. Rick Davis [ 44 ] Rick Davis, acting director of custody services and formerly director of operational support for the Ministry of Justice testified. As director of operational support he was responsible for the inmate phone system in all facilities in Saskatchewan.

He was able to access telephone records and create copies for investigating officers with legal authority to receive those copies. [ 45 ] When an inmate is admitted to a correctional centre, they are provided with a PIN number to be used when making a telephone call. At the same time, a biometric voice print of each inmate is created which is associated with the PIN number. Inmates and call recipients are informed in advance that calls can be recorded. [ 46 ] Mr. Davis was aware that inmates use each other’s telephone accounts.

The most common way for an inmate to bypass a voice print and PIN is to place a call and then hand the receiver to another inmate. [ 47 ] In response to the production orders, Mr. Davis provided the information requested by Sgt. Grabowski. He accessed the telephone system, identified and copied the calls by burning them onto an encrypted DVD disc, which was provided to the police. By separate email he sent the encryption password to Sgt Grabowski. Audio recordings [ 48 ] Audio recordings of four telephone calls, burned onto a DVD disc by Mr. Davis, were played at the trial.

Transcripts of those recordings were provided as an aid for the Court. The disc of those recordings was admitted as Exhibit P-2. Excerpts from the calls are reproduced as follows. The emphasis is mine.

(1) Call number 42 on October 27, 2016 at 5:09 p.m. from Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas ’ s account Caller : “ Oh a ride, yo ’ go pick up my ride man, go pick up my car yo ’ , it ’ s on Avenue V . Sharise : Your. Your car ’ s on Avenue V, where is it? Caller : Yeah, it ’ s on Avenue V and 16th .

Sharise : Where ’ s the keys? Caller : Ah fuck Harley , you know Baby Mama, Baby Mama has my keys . . . . Caller : Fuck yeah yo ’ , yo ’ and yo ’ everything in the trunk burn it . . . . Caller : Yeah Baby Mama has my . . . Caller : keys and I parked it . . . Caller : on Avenue V

(2) Call number 31 on October 30, 2016 from Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas ’ s account Caller : [Rico ’ s] under rank investigation? . . . Sharise : For what you got picked up for. Caller : For that high speed? . . . Sharise : Yeah, yeah. Caller : Fuck hey. See because yo ’ that ’ s what I ’ m telling you guys that fucking white boy Zane , I seen it yo ’ when I went to court he wrote a fucking statement man, I seen it with my own fucking eyes. . . .

Caller : An yo ’ he, he said that I can ’ t believe in that statement he says like she honestly scared me and I, I ’ m gonna die from the way she was driving and she was saying that it ’ s ride or die remember fucking . . . Caller : (laughs) he, he was just screaming around but fuck him yo ’ , you guys can ’ t fuck man, I ’ ll tell you something you guys gonna have, fuck he ’ s in jail man, Saskatoon Correctional.

(3) Call number 48 on November 6, 2016 from Chelsey Cook ’ s account Caller : Yeah fuck yeah man and then I ’ ll be able to get out asap at, well actually not asap it ’ s probably then fuck I don ’ t know, but I ’ ll get out soon, as soon as they drop those charges it ’ s fucking, they have nothing on me at all man except fucking, Zane ’ s fucking statement but he ’ s fuck all. . . .

Caller : Fuck man yo ’ man you know when I fucking got caught with the fucking ride I did , or when I fucking got arrested for that high speed yo ’ man they, I didn ’ t even fucking know, I thought they didn ’ t find that ride and then I guess that fucking white boy Zane fucking took the police straight to that fucking ride . . . . Caller : I know he took them right fucking to it man fuck cause he ’ s like, in his statement he was saying that I was the driver and they ’ re

like well prove it where’s the ride fucking parked and he took the cops right to the fucking ride.

(4) Call number 30 on November 18, 2016 from Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas’s account The caller once again refers to “Zane” and “the white boy” but tells the recipient of the call she is innocent. Discussion Credibility and reliability of Zane Crowe’s testimony [49] Zane Crowe testified that the accused Shaylin Sutherland-Kayseas was the driver of the Impala in which he was a frightenedpassenger at the time of the offences.

As a key Crown witness on the issue of the driver’s identity, I must consider carefully hiscredibility and the reliability of his evidence. [50] It is my view that the principles in R v Vetrovec, (SCC), [1982] 1 SCR 811 [Vetrovec] apply to Mr.Crowe’s testimony. Vetrovec cautions of the danger in convicting an accused on the testimony of an unsavoury or disreputable witnesswithout corroborating or confirmatory evidence. [51] Confirmatory evidence need not corroborate the witness’s testimony in every respect.

On the totality of theevidence, the Court is entitled to believe the evidence of a disreputable witness, if satisfied the witness, despite their frailties orshortcomings, is truthful in the relevant aspects of their testimony: R v Kehler, 2004 SCC 11 paras 12 and 22, [2004] 1 SCR 328. [52] In assessing whether a witness’s testimony is inherently untrustworthy, a court must look at factors such as: (1)whether the witness is facing charges; (2) whether the witness openly acknowledges participation in the crime; (3) whether the witnesshas anything to gain or lose by testifying; (iv) whether the witness is testifying to deflect blame on another; (

v) whether the witness isprotecting another; (vi) whether there is some other reason why the witness would seek to blame another or minimize his or her ownparticipation: R v Brass, 2007 SKCA 94 at para 24, 226 CCC (3d) 216. [53] For the following reasons, I find that Zane Crowe to be disreputable witness requiring the Court to be particularly cautious inassessing his evidence. [54] Although not an accomplice or co-accused, Zane Crowe admitted to being in the vehicle involved in the high-speed chase. [55] At detention, he provided a statement pointing to Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas as the driver and ultimately directed police to thelocation of the Impala. By implicating Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas, he deflected suspicion that he might have been driving. Initially he wasconsidered a potential suspect, however that changed once Cst. Pozniak and Cst. Taylor indicated they had observed a female driving thevehicle. Zane Crowe was not charged in relation to the high-speed chase. [56] Zane Crowe is a hard drug user.

On the day in question, he admitted to taking significant amounts of dilaudid and crystalmethamphetamine, to the point of being “pretty high”. [57] Zane Crowe acknowledged that he attempted to run when the police arrived, demonstrating his desire to evade the police andavoid prosecution, because of outstanding warrants. Once detained, he provided a false name, establishing a propensity to be untruthful.

[ 58 ] There are other reasons to be concerned about Mr. Crowe’s testimony. [ 59 ] It was suggested by defence that Mr. Crowe’s drug consumption and injured wrist might have influenced the reliability of the information provided to the police. However, according to both Cst. Noesgaard and Sgt. Lund, Zane Crowe appeared to be sober at detention and at the time he directed the police to the Impala. Cst. Noesgaard testified they were in the patrol car with Zane Crowe for 52 minutes before he was taken to the hospital.

However, there was no evidence from Zane Crowe to suggest that he was pressured to make a statement or disclose the Impala’s location in order to receive medical treatment. [ 60 ] Some of Zane Crowe’s testimony was confusing. He used different names when referring to the accused. He told Cst. Lund the driver was “ Linshay ” Sutherland. At trial, he referred to her as “ Corinna Suther ” . He recalled the colour of his cousin ’ s truck as black or brown – not red as suggested by police witnesses.

He described the vehicle in which he rode with the accused as possibly a white Escalade or Mercedes, but ultimately was uncertain. I attribute these lapses in memory to the passage of time. However, the matter of who was driving the Impala would not have been something easily forgotten. [ 61 ] Overall, Zane Crowe ’ s testimony regarding the events leading up to, during and after the high-speed chase is internally consistent. Further, his testimony was not shaken on cross-examination. He denied implicating Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas to avoid being charged.

He spontaneously testified he was not worried about being charged because his fingerprints would not have been on the steering wheel, but the female ’ s would have been. [ 62 ] Nonetheless, given its shortcomings, it would be dangerous to accept Zane Crowe’s testimony without corroboration. What evidence, if any, confirms Zane Crowe ’s testimony? Eyewitness identification [ 63 ] Both Cst. Taylor and Cst. Pozniak testified the driver of the Impala was a Native female. [ 64 ] Cst.

Taylor observed the Impala approach from the east and pass within 30 feet in front of his parked vehicle which was facing north in a back lane. The officer estimated the Impala was travelling 20 km per hour. His view of the driver’s side was momentary, lasting only seconds. He observed the driver was a Native female with her hair pulled back in a ponytail and believed the passenger was a male. Cst. Taylor was operating the radios and on the phone during this time. The individuals in the vehicle were unknown to him. [ 65 ] Cst.

Pozniak saw two people in the Impala, a Native female driver and an unshaven male passenger. He estimated the Impala was travelling southbound between 40 – 50 km per hour and his vehicle was stationary facing north. As the Impala passed him, within 10 feet at its closest point, he observed the driver for 5 to 10 seconds. He was able to view the front and side profile of the driver’s face as she drove by. [ 66 ] The inherent frailties of eyewitness identification have long been recognized.

In R v Bigsky , 2006 SKCA 145 , 289 Sask R 179 , Jackson JA provided an extensive survey of authorities regarding eyewitness identification and the factors to be considered, including the nature and quality of the observation, whether the accused was known to the witness and whether there is corroborative evidence. Those factors were confirmed in R v Delorme , 2017 SKCA 3 . [ 67 ] The officers’ observations were brief and they did not know the accused prior to the events in this case. However, as officers involved in surveillance of the Impala, their role was to watch carefully and to report what they saw.

Both officers drew independent, yet consistent, conclusions about the gender and ancestry of the driver and passenger. Although the Impala was moving, the officers were stationary. Both officers were able to estimate the speed of the Impala, distances and relative positions of their vehicles at the critical

time. Both officers had a full-face view, while one also saw the driver’s profile. Cst. Pozniak may have been influenced after viewing the photograph of Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas earlier in the day, but that does not diminish his general description as that of a Native female with a male passenger. [ 68 ] I accept the testimony of the officers that the driver of the Impala was a Native female and the passenger was a male. As between the two individuals in the vehicle the officers’ testimony rules out the male as the driver.

Therefore, the officers’ testimony confirms and supports Zane Crowe’s evidence. [ 69 ] At trial, Zane Crowe, Cst. Noesgaard and Cst. Bird identified the accused. However, “in-dock identification” of an accused seated in the prisoner’s box is of limited value in these circumstances. Audio recordings of phone calls [ 70 ] Sgt. Grabowski and Mr. Davis testified with regard to the Telmate system in Pine Grove and the safeguards in place to ensure, as far as possible, that the individual using a phone account is the person to whom the account is assigned. Both Sgt. Grabowski and Mr.

Davis acknowledged that despite these safeguards, it is possible for one inmate to use the telephone account of another. [ 71 ] I am satisfied that the caller in each of the recorded calls was the accused, based upon the content of the calls; the consistency of the language used; the references to the “high-speed”, her vehicle and Zane; as well as the connection between what she said and the circumstances of the offences. [ 72 ] With respect to the telephone calls from the accused’s account on October 27, 2016 and October 30, 2016, the accused referred to “getting arrested for that high speed” and that the police have nothing on her except Zane’s statement. [ 73 ] The accused referred to “my car, it’s on Avenue V” and that “I parked it on Avenue V”.

Cst. Lund testified that Zane Crowe took the officers to the vehicle parked on Avenue V. I note the accused told Sharise her car was on “Avenue V and 16th” while Sgt. Lund testified the Impala was located between Avenue U and Avenue V near 18 th Street. I do not consider this discrepancy significant given the close proximity of the two locations. [ 74 ] The accused asked the recipient of the call to burn everything in the trunk. Items with the accused ’ s DNA were found in the trunk of the Impala. [ 75 ] The accused told Sharise “Harley…has my keys”.

The Impala’s key fob was found in the Dodge Dakota in which Harley Crowe picked up Zane and the accused. [ 76 ] In the telephone call from Chelsey Cook’s account on November 6, 2016, the caller referred to being “caught” with the “fucking ride” (which I take to mean the vehicle) and that she did not realize “the ride” had been found, but that the “white boy Zane” took the police “straight to that fucking ride”.

Although the call was from Chelsey Cook’s account, I am satisfied the caller was the accused. [ 77 ] Given the close correspondence between the accused’s comments in the calls and the circumstances of the offences, I am satisfied that in these telephone calls, the accused is referring to the events of October 19, 2016. [ 78 ] I find the recorded telephone calls confirm Zane Crowe’s testimony.

Other circumstantial evidence [ 79 ] The accused’s DNA was found on blue jeans located in a garbage bag in the trunk of the vehicle. An ashtray with the name “Shaylin” on it was found inside the vehicle. On its own, this evidence does not establish the accused as the driver, but it does connect her to the vehicle. [ 80 ] Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas entered and was later arrested from the rear of the red Dodge Dakota truck belonging to Harley Crowe. The Impala’s key fob was found in the glove box of the truck. A telephone conversation from Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas’ inmate account referenced the key to her car being with Harley. [ 81 ] Cst. Pozniak testified the Impala drove past him at 2:56 p.m. on Avenue K. Sgt. Amyotte was engaged in the high-speed pursuit from 2:57 p.m. to 3:00 p.m., according to the patrol car video. At 3:04 p.m., Cst. Pozniak saw the same two individuals who had been in the car, walking through a park near the 400 block of Avenue U. He observed the individuals get into the Dodge Dakota, in which they were found at 3:30 p.m. The Impala was later located, parked on Avenue V. [ 82 ] I am satisfied that between 2:56 p.m., when Cst.

Pozniak saw the Impala being driven by a female, and 2:57 p.m., when the pursuit began, there would have been little or no opportunity for those in the Impala to change drivers. Further, although there was a period of four minutes (3:00 p.m. to 3:04 p.m.) in which the officers did not observe the male and female, the continuity was re- established when the accused and Zane Crowe were picked up by Harley’s truck. [ 83 ] The evidence also supports the contention that the Impala pursued by the police, the Impala parked on Avenue V and the accused’s vehicle are the same. [ 84 ] The testimony of Cst. Taylor and Cst.

Pozniak, as well as the accused’s telephone conversations and other circumstantial evidence is sufficient to corroborate and confirm Zane Crowe’s testimony. I therefore accept Zane Crowe’s testimony with respect to the events of October 19, 2016, and in particular that the accused was the driver of the Impala at the time of the high-speed pursuit. [ 85 ] In

summary, the evidence establishes that Zane Crowe was picked up by his cousin Harley Crowe in his truck. They met the accused because Harley had some business with her. Zane Crowe got into the Impala with the accused, at his cousin’s request. Zane Crowe and the accused left, with the accused driving. The Impala was involved in a high-speed pursuit. Cst. Pozniak and Cst.Taylor saw a female driver and male passenger in the Impala. I accept the driver was the accused. Within a matter of four minutes, the accused and Zane Crowe were picked up by a truck driven by Harley Crowe.

Zane Crowe told the police in detention that the accused was the driver and took them to the Impala, parked on Avenue V. Items belonging to the accused were found in the trunk. Audio recordings from the accused confirm that she had been caught for a high-speed chase, that Zane took the police to the vehicle, that she initially believed her car was still on Avenue V where she had parked it, that Harley Crowe had the keys and that she had items in the trunk that she wanted burned. Conclusion [ 86 ] On the totality of the evidence, I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms.

Sutherland-Kayseas was the operator of the Impala during the pursuit. [ 87 ] There is no question that Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas operated the vehicle in a dangerous manner and for the purpose of evading Sgt. Noesgaard. She drove at excessive speeds on city streets and into on-coming traffic, after Sgt. Noesgaard activated his emergency lights and siren. [ 88 ] I therefore find Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas guilty on counts 1 and 2.

[ 89 ] I am also satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, based upon the uncontroverted evidence of Cst. Noesgaard, that Ms. Sutherland-Kayseas wilfully obstructed justice by providing a false name and therefore find her guilty of count 3. [ 90 ] The defence admitted that on October 19, 2016, the accused was bound by a probation order and an undertaking each with a condition that she keep the peace and be of good behavior. [ 91 ] Therefore, based upon my findings of fact and conclusions, I am satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that Ms.

Sutherland- Kayseas is guilty of failing to comply with conditions of her probation order and undertaking that she keep the peace and be of good behavior. _____________________________ D.C. Scott, J