R. v. Miller, 2024 ONCJ 75

ONTARIO COURT OF JUSTICE CITATION: R. v. Miller , 2024 ONCJ 75 DATE: 2024 02 06 COURT FILE No.: Pembroke 22-0384; 22-37100495 BETWEEN: HIS MAJESTY THE KING — AND — MATTHEW MILLER Before Justice J.R.

RICHARDSON Heard on August 30, 31, October 5, 2023 Reasons for Judgment released on February 6, 2024 Connor Kyte......................................................................................... counsel for the Crown Adrian Cleaver.............................................................................. counsel for the defendant RICHARDSON J.: Introduction [ 1 ] “Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.

One will be for yourself”. [ 2 ] This old proverb, attributed to Confucius, is one that anyone who is considering acting in vengeance should think about before they so act. [ 3 ] Matthew Miller certainly should have. [ 4 ] He is charged with assaulting Ryan James Taylor. At the outset of the trial, he was also charged with uttering a threat to Karen Venasse and breaching an undertaking by communicating with Karen Venasse. The Crown withdrew the uttering a threat charge mid- trial. [ 5 ] There is no love lost between Matthew Miller and Karen Venasse.

They had a relationship and they share at least four children, that Mr. Miller is estranged from. They were involved in a family court dispute. [ 6 ] Ryan Taylor is now Karen Venasse’s boyfriend. It would also appear that he has become a party to the acrimony between Miller and Venasse. [ 7 ] On February 2, 2023, three individuals stormed Matthew Miller’s residence in rural Quebec. They attacked his house and his truck with crowbars or axes.

The Quebec police were contacted and apparently laid charges. [ 8 ] What happened with those charges, as well as a multitude of other charges laid against all of the players, which should have been a straight-forward thing to determine, is apparently shrouded in the same mystery and uncertainty that accompanies the Caramilk secret. Ryan Taylor and Karen Venasse were apparently charged with the invasion of Matthew Miller’s home and the mischief to his truck, but for reasons apparently unknown to anyone, those charges were ultimately withdrawn.

[9] On the date in question, Matthew Miller was operating his vehicle on Highway 148 east of Pembroke, Ontario. [10] Highway 148 in Ontario connects with Highway 148 in Quebec and it crosses the interprovincial bridge just east of Pembroke. Just before one turns to head toward the bridge, there is an Esso gas station.

The gas station is particularly popular because it has been inbusiness for a very long time, it is located in a convenient place near the corner where Highway 148 turns, it is the last gas station on theOntario side before one crosses the bridge and a litre of gas in Ontario is generally cheaper than a litre of gas in Quebec. [11] As Matthew Miller passed the gas station, he observed Karen Venasse’s truck at the gas station.

Karen Venasse and RyanTaylor had stopped there to get gas. [12] Karen Venasse and Ryan Taylor would have me believe that Matthew Miller stopped his truck and approached them in order toassault them and utter a threat toward them. [13] Mathew Miller would have me believe that he innocently stopped there to buy some Red Bull. He also claims that he thoughthis daughter might be driving the truck and he would take the opportunity to have a short visit with her. He would have me believewhen he went in to buy his Red Bull, he saw Mr. Taylor and told Taylor he wanted to speak to him about what happened at his house.

He would have me believe that while he was waiting for this discussion outside, Ryan Taylor attacked him as he left the store. He ofcourse, then defended himself. [14] This is an unusual case in the sense I don’t believe much of what anyone who testified before me had to say, other thanConstable Bangs, who was called to investigate this case. [15] How then do I conclude that Matthew Miller assaulted Ryan Taylor? [16] Video surveillance. Constable Bangs was able to obtain video surveillance from the store.

The video surveillance, which depictsthe incident almost as plainly as the nose on my face, allows me to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Matthew Miller recognisedRyan Taylor when he went into the Esso store, planned to assault Ryan Taylor as he waited there, and executed that plan immediately asRyan Taylor left the store. It is evidence that permits me to overcome serious credibility issues with the evidence of Ryan Taylor andKaren Venasse.

It is evidence which permits me to reject and not be left in the slightest doubt by the evidence of Matthew Miller. [17] For the reasons that follow, therefore, Ryan Miller is found guilty as charged. A Note About the Burden of Proof and the W.(D.) Formulation [18] This judgment is unusual in the sense that I begin with an assessment of the video surveillance from inside and outside the storewhere the incident occurred. In this way, rather than analyse the evidence at the conclusion of the judgment, I have generally analysedthe evidence in the order it was presented to me. [19] Let me, however, be clear.

Throughout my analysis, I have instructed myself in keeping with the time-tested approach in W.(D.),infra, and the presumption that Mr. Miller is at all times innocent until the Crown proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. [20] The Crown must prove the elements of the offences beyond a reasonable doubt. The Crown bears the onus of establishing them.The onus never shifts to Mr. Miller. A reasonable doubt is not an imaginary, far-fetched or frivolous doubt. It is not a doubt based onsympathy for or prejudice against anyone. It is a doubt that is based on reason and common sense.

It is a doubt that logically arises fromthe evidence or the absence of evidence. [21] In R. v. W.(D.), (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742, the Supreme Court of Canada instructed triers of fact to assessevidence in this way:

a) First, if you believe the evidence of the accused, obviously you must acquit.

b) Second, if you do not believe the testimony of the accused but you are left in reasonable doubt by it, you must acquit.

c) Third, even if you are not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, you must ask yourself whether, on the basis of the evidencewhich you do accept, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by that evidence of the guilt of the accused. [22] The caselaw is clear that W.(D.) is not a “magic incantation” (R. v. S.(W.D.) (SCC). Although the analysis in thiscase does not follow the W.(D.) “order of operations”, I have at all times remained true to its meaning and import. [23] Nor is this a case where I have compared each person’s account and decided which account I believe: R. v.

Esquivel-Benitez, 2020 ONCA 160. [24] The law is clear that I can believe or disbelieve a witness, but still be left with a reasonable doubt after considering all theevidence. Further, when considering the testimony of a witness, a Court can accept all, some, or none of a witness’ testimony. [25] Finally what this case really turns on is a complete rejection of the accused’s evidence based on a considered and reasonedacceptance of the videotape surveillance and the text messaging.

Admissions [26] At the outset of the trial, the parties advised that date, time, identification, jurisdiction of the court, authenticity of the variouscourt documents, and the text messaging that became exhibits were admitted. What the Video Surveillance Shows

Inside the Store [ 27 ] The video of the inside the store opens with Ryan Taylor in the foreground. He is waiting his turn in line. Immediate to his left is an Ontario Lottery Corporation station. Mr. Taylor is dressed in a brown and camouflage hoody. He is wearing a camouflage baseball hat. Sunglasses are on his head. [ 28 ] The inside of the store is long and narrow. The door from the outside is located in the middle of the store. There are refrigerators surrounding the store’s perimeter.

The cashier’s area is out of view. [ 29 ] I note that when this occurred, Ontario was in the midst of the COVID-19 mask mandate. Mr. Taylor is masked. [ 30 ] At one minute and twenty seconds into the video, Mr. Miller enters the store. He immediately sees Mr. Taylor. Mr. Taylor has his back to him and does not notice Mr. Miller enter the store. Mr. Miller is not wearing a mask. [ 31 ] Mr. Miller proceeded to his left toward the back of the store where the refrigerators are located. He looks over his shoulder toward Mr. Taylor twice as he walks back there. Mr. Taylor, still waiting to pay, has his back to Mr.

Miller. [ 32 ] At 1:30, Mr. Miller opens the refrigerator. The refrigerator then closes. I am not able to see whether he has anything in his hand because the area where his standing is partially obscured by other store displays. Mr. Miller then walks back into the aisle where he has a clearer view of Mr. Taylor and removes what would later be revealed to be two cans of Red Bull. He then walks back toward the area where Mr. Taylor is standing. [ 33 ] He looked again in Mr. Taylor’s direction and then walked back to the same refrigerator, where he opened the door. He then headed back down the aisle toward Mr.

Taylor. As he does so, two beverage cans are observed in his hands. [ 34 ] He comes up behind Mr. Taylor, who is still oblivious to his presence. He looks at Mr. Taylor and then steps back to look out the exterior door in the direction of the Taylor/Venasse vehicle. [ 35 ] At 2:52 into the video, Mr. Taylor steps forward and toward the cashier’s area and goes out of view of the video. [ 36 ] An older patron is now observed exciting the store. [ 37 ] Mr. Miller steps forward. He is clenching the two beverage cans – one in each hand which he is holding down to his side. Mr.

Miller watches the older patron move toward the exit. He then goes back to the door of the store, looks out in the direction of the Taylor/Venasse vehicle, and exits the store to allow the older patron to leave. [ 38 ] At 3:35 into the video, another patron, dressed in a camouflage coat wearing a tuque and a mask (camouflage is apparently a popular pattern in Renfrew County) enters through the open door. Mr. Miller, still clenching the beverage cans re-enters the store and gets in line behind this patron. [ 39 ] At 3:50 into the video, Mr.

Miller leaves both cans of Red Bull on the Ontario Lottery station counter. Mr. Taylor is still out of sight. [ 40 ] Yet another patron leaves the store. [ 41 ] Mr. Miller then proceeds out of sight toward the cashier’s area. The two cans of Red Bull are still visible on the Lottery station counter. [ 42 ] About ten seconds later, Mr. Miller comes back down the aisle and stops and waits near the door. He looks back toward the cashier’s area. He looks out the door a couple of times and zips up his coat. [ 43 ] At about 5:00 into the video, two more patrons enter the store. Mr.

Miller moves out of the way for them to come into the store. One of them heads to the beverage refrigerators toward the rear and the other goes toward the cashier’s area. Mr. Miller remains by the door. [ 44 ] Mr. Taylor is now observed to be walking down the isle toward the exit. [ 45 ] Mr. Miller goes out of the door ahead of him, but he backs out of the door so that he is facing Mr. Taylor. [ 46 ] At 5:14 into the video, Mr. Taylor exits the store. [ 47 ] Immediately as he leaves, he is observed to go up against a glass window in the alcove of the door.

Both men are out of the view of the internal camera. [ 48 ] The only other thing of note is that at 5:48 into the video, Ms Venasse is observed to enter the front door of the store and say something in the direction of the cashier and then leave. Outside the Store [ 49 ] There is a one minute and 28 second video of the exterior of the store. Gas pumps are visible. There is a Dodge minivan parked at one pump and a small red stepside pick up parked in front of it. The motor is running on the red truck at this time of year the exhaust fumes were visible exiting from the tailpipe.

The red stepside pick up is the Taylor/Venasse vehicle. [ 50 ] There is an ice machine on the right side of the video. The ice machine blocks a complete view of the door of the store which is in an alcove.

[ 51 ] At eight seconds into the video, the two men emerge from the alcove. Miller, dressed in the baseball hat, is holding on to Taylor. Then men fight in the area between the entrance to the store and the minivan. At one point both men are fighting on the ground immediately adjacent to the passenger side front wheel of the minivan. In the course of the fight, both men lose their hats. Mr. Taylor’s tuque is observed on the ground near the entrance. Mr.

Miller’s baseball cap is observed on the ground between the minivan and the red truck. [ 52 ] At fifteen seconds into the video, the passenger side door of the Taylor/Venasse red pick up opens and a person with her hair in a bun (Ms Venasse) tries to intervene in the fight. Unsuccessful, she then runs into the front door (as shown earlier in my review of the first video). [ 53 ] The men are able to get to their feet and continue to fight up against the minivan. Mr. Miller is observed to have the upper hand and he holds Mr.

Taylor with his left hand while landing several punches with his right. [ 54 ] At 57 seconds into the video the two men, with Ms Venasse watching, enter the alcove area of the store entrance where they are out of view of the first camera. Mr. Miller emerges from the fray at 1:03, goes to the area of his hat, retrieves it and dons it. Ms Venasse is following him and I have no doubt they are exchanging words. [ 55 ] At 1:07 he starts walking toward his vehicle, while looking back in Ms Venasse’s direction. At 1:11 he reverses course and walks back toward her where she is bending down to retrieve Mr. Taylor’s hat.

More words are exchanged. He then walks out of view towards his vehicle. Ms Venasse put Mr. Taylor’s hat in the truck and then went back into the store. Conclusions from the Video Evidence [ 56 ] It is inescapable that Mr. Miller entered the store and waited for the purpose of confronting and assaulting Mr. Taylor. Mr. Miller allowed two other patrons to advance in the line ahead of him. Although he selected two cans of Red Bull from the cooler, he never paid for them and left them on the lottery station counter. [ 57 ] Defence counsel submitted that it was Mr. Taylor, not Mr.

Miller, who threw the first punch as Mr. Taylor was leaving the store. I disagree. Mr. Miller clearly goes out the door facing Mr. Taylor. Within one second of Mr. Taylor exiting the store, the video shows him being pushed up against the window of the store. It is patently obvious that he did not throw the first punch. [ 58 ] I am mindful of the fact that the videotape evidence does not completely depict the incident. In my view, assessed against the backdrop of the whole of the evidence, it gives rise to the inescapable and undeniable inference that the Mr. Miller assaulted Mr.

Taylor in the manner I have described just outside the door of the gas station. [ 59 ] In this way, it is a piece of circumstantial evidence. [ 60 ] As mandated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Villaroman 2016 SCC 33 , I have assessed this evidence as a whole in light of human experience and found that, notwithstanding defence counsel’s able argument, there is no other reasonable alternative conclusion to draw as to what took place. Mr. Miller’s evidence, which I reject for reasons set out below, that Mr. Taylor was the first to strike him, is implausible and unreasonable.

Ryan Taylor Examination-in-Chief [ 61 ] Ryan Taylor is 38 years of age. He works at a local concrete company. [ 62 ] He stated that he does not know Matthew Miller, other than he knows that Miller is the ex-partner of his girlfriend Karen Venasse. He stated that he did not know what Mr. Miller looked like before this incident. He allowed that he might have seen one photo of Mr. Miller before this took place. [ 63 ] He stated that the incident happened at about 9:30 am on February 26. [ 64 ] He recalled seeing Mr. Miller beside him. He recalled Mr.

Miller looking at him and looking at the security cameras in the store. [ 65 ] He recalled that when he was waiting in line to pay there were a couple of people in front of him. When it came time for him to pay, he bought some lottery ticks, paid for his gas and proceeded to leave the store. He recalled that Mr. Miller held the door for him. He said that as he left the store he was attacked from behind.

He felt a fist in the back of his head. [ 66 ] Taylor recalled “tussling around” and being up against a van. “Finally, he let go and I went inside the store”, he said. [ 67 ] He recalled that Ms Venasse came out and tried to stop Mr. Miller. He stated that when she was doing this, she was right beside and yelling at Mr. Miller to stop. [ 68 ] After the incident, he waited for the police to arrive. He suffered a bloody nose and a bloody lip. He did not suffer any broken bones. Cross-examination [ 69 ] In cross-examination, Mr. Taylor agreed that Ms Venasse was living with Mr. Miller before she started seeing him.

He also agreed that he knew that Mr. Miller lived in Waltham Quebec, but he was not sure what street he lived on. He believed that Mr. Miller owned a 1995 Chevrolet pick-up truck.

[ 70 ] Mr. Taylor denied visiting Mr. Miller’s home several days before the incident and smashing Mr. Taylor’s pick-up truck. Defence counsel suggested that he went there with two other individuals, one of whom was his brother. Mr. Taylor denied. It. Defence counsel suggested that they were carrying axes and tire irons and caused $28,000 in damage. Mr. Taylor denied it. [ 71 ] Mr. Taylor denied that he was charged in Quebec in relation to that incident.

He denied knowing that there was a trial coming up in Quebec in relation to that incident. [ 72 ] At this point, there was a lengthy break in the evidence while the Crown contacted the Quebec authorities. When we resumed, the Crown advised that he had contacted the Surete du Quebec in Campbell’s Bay Quebec, and been advised that Mr. Taylor was charged with mischief, but the charges were withdrawn in July 2023. [ 73 ] Defence counsel then asked Mr. Taylor again about whether he was charged in relation to the Quebec incident involving Mr. Miller’s house but the charges were withdrawn. Mr.

Taylor stated, “I have no idea”. He then stated that he went to see the Quebec police because of something to do with his ex-girlfriend. [ 74 ] When defence counsel further asked Mr. Taylor about this, he indicated that he was on probation for Obstructing Justice over a text message. [ 75 ] Defence counsel then asked Mr. Taylor if he was charged with breach of a release order in relation to Mr. Miller. Mr. Taylor answered that he did not recall that at all. [ 76 ] Prior to proceeding with further cross-examination, I explained the effect of

section 5 of the Canada Evidence Act to Mr. Taylor. [ 77 ] Defence counsel then proceeded to ask Mr. Taylor again about the February 2, 2022 incident at Mr. Miller’s home in Waltham Quebec. Mr. Taylor denied being involved in that incident. [ 78 ] Defence counsel then showed Exhibit 1, which is the video of the incident at Mr. Miller’s home, to Mr. Taylor. In the video three people are observed entering Mr. Miller’s property. All of them are carrying weapons, either a crowbar or an axe. They proceed to attack a vehicle later identified as Mr.

Miller’s truck, destroying the mirror, the grill and inflicting damage to the body of the vehicle. They also proceed to strike the garage. The video is one minute and 51 seconds in length. After damaging the vehicle and the garage, the individuals appear to get into a waiting vehicle. [ 79 ] Mr. Taylor denied that he was one of the people who damaged the truck and the house. He specifically denied that the man in the video who is seen approaching the house at 49 seconds into the vehicle was him. He also denied that another person who was there was his brother Matthew. [ 80 ] Defence counsel put Exhibit A to Mr.

Taylor, which was purported to be a text message sent by him before the incident at Mr. Miller’s house on or about January 26, 2022. The message says “I guess cocksuckers need there sleep you must have had such a busy cocksucking nite. You must be the bitch in the realtionship. If not you will be. [five laughing emojis] sleep tight goodnight. You awake. Get up. Come on get up.” Mr. Taylor said he did not recall sending those messages. [ 81 ] Defence counsel seized on Mr. Taylor’s choice of words, that he did not remember sending those messages. Defence counsel pressed, “Is it possible you did?” Mr.

Taylor replied, “I don’t know; probably not. Why would I want to stir the shit pot?” [ 82 ] Defence counsel then put a second text in Exhibit A, sent on February 2, 2022, in which the sender told Mr. Miller, “By by Matt I’ll hold your hand while we jump in”. Mr. Taylor said he did not recall sending those messages. [ 83 ] Defence counsel put Exhibit B, another text message purported to be sent by Mr. Taylor to Mr. Miller on or about January 26, 2022 to Mr. Taylor, which stated, “How will I be welcomed at your door. But the real question is what will you see on the other side of your door??????????????

Answer that question. I’ll be waiting. Or will you be waiting???? ???????? Get up fuck head. Get the fuck up lookout your fucking window.”. Mr. Taylor replied, “I don't recall saying anything like that or even being on a device saying anything like that.” [ 84 ] Defence counsel established that when Mr. Taylor gave his police statement he did not say that Mr. Miller tried to push him through the window. At first Mr. Taylor disagreed, but after reviewing his videotaped statement, he agreed that this was a detail he must have forgotten when he gave his videotaped statement.

He denied defence counsel’s suggestion that this is something that Ms Venasse told him that she told the officer when she gave her statement. [ 85 ] Defence counsel also established during cross-examination of Mr. Taylor that despite his evidence in-chief that he did not know where Mr. Miller lived, he had in fact dated a woman, Crystal Labine, who rented from Mr. Miller and Ms Venasse when they lived together. He agreed that Ms Labine’s rented accommodation was next to Mr. Miller’s house. [ 86 ] Defence counsel asked Mr.

Taylor about something that he told the officer in his statement, “I want to get this guy off my frigging back.” Defence counsel asked Mr. Taylor how “he” (referring to Mr. Miller) was on his back. He stated, “In October I came back from working Friday afternoon. I parked my work truck and I got a call saying that all four of my tires in my work truck were slashed. I can’t prove it was him but I don’t have other enemies.” Mr. Taylor stated that this happened in September or October 2021. Conclusions with Respect to the Evidence of Ryan Taylor [ 87 ] As I set out, I do not believe Mr.

Taylor, except to the extent that what he said was corroborated by the videotape surveillance from the Esso station or the observations of Constable Bangs. [ 88 ] He was evasive about whether he was charged in Quebec in relation to mischief on Mr. Miller’s house and vehicle.

[ 89 ] Rather than deny sending the text messages to Mr. Miller that defence counsel showed him, Mr. Taylor stated that he did not recall. I thought that was a curious thing for him to say. If he had sent these text messages, he would have remembered. If he didn’t send them, the appropriate way to respond to the question would have been to outright deny them. Instead, he said he did not recall. [ 90 ] I note as well that when describing the assault itself, Mr. Taylor said he was hit from behind. This is not borne out by the video surveillance which gives rise to the undeniable inference that Mr. Miller hit Mr.

Taylor immediately as the latter exited the store. There is no evidence that Mr. Taylor had his back to Mr. Miller as he was leaving the store. Evidence of Constable Kurt Bangs [ 91 ] Constable Bangs stated that he was dispatched to the Esso station after police received a report of a physical altercation between two men. When he arrived on scene he spoke with Ryan Taylor and Karen Venasse. He observed blood on Mr. Taylor’s sweater. Mr.

Taylor told him that he had bled from the nose but he had cleaned his face before the officer arrived. [ 92 ] After speaking to Taylor and Venasse, Constable Bangs proceeded to review the videotape of the incident which I have already described. He stated that he formed grounds to charge Mr. Miller with assault based on that video. [ 93 ] At this point, the video of the interior and exterior of the Esso station was played and entered into evidence as Exhibits 2 and 3. [ 94 ] The officer also indicated that he was advised that Mr. Miller and Ms Venasse had been in a relationship for several years.

After that relationship ended, Mr. Miller was charged with offences against Ms Venasse. On February 4, 2022, he was placed on an undertaking which prohibited him from having any contact with her directly or indirectly unless to discuss child care. The undertaking, which was issued in Campbell’s Bay Quebec, was entered into evidence as Exhibit 4. I note that at the outset of the trial, this undertaking was one of the admissions that defence counsel made on behalf of Mr.

Miller. [ 95 ] In cross-examination, Constable Bangs agreed that there were arrows on the floor of the interior of the store which pointed people in the direction that they were supposed to take. Constable Bangs stated that he could not recall whether he examined Mr. Taylor’s hands. [ 96 ] Constable Bangs agreed that he did not lay a charge against Mr. Miller for assaulting Ms Venasse because he could not conclusively determine from the video that Mr. Miller assaulted her. He also agreed that without audio, he could not determine what was said between Mr. Miller and Ms Venasse, or for that matter between Mr.

Miller and Mr. Taylor. [ 97 ] With respect to the accuracy of the exterior video, the officer agreed that it appeared to be recording things more quickly than normal time. He was not sure how much quicker. Evidence of Karen Venasse In-Chief [ 98 ] Ms Venasse testified that she has known Mr. Miller since late 1989. They lived together in Ontario between 2004 and 2011. They were “on and off” in their relationship between 2011 and 2019. They lived together in Quebec between 2019 and 2021. They have four children who are ages 12, 13, 15 and 19. [ 99 ] She recalled that at one point Mr.

Miller was on conditions not to talk to her unless it was about the children. [ 100 ] On February 26, 2022, she went to the Esso Gas Station with Mr. Miller. They were operating her red Mazda pick up. She stated that she has owned that vehicle since 2018. She believed that Mr. Miller was well aware that she owned it. She also explained that the vehicle stood out because it has a black eagle on the back of it. She pointed out the black eagle as being visible on the tailgate of the red truck in the exterior video entered as Exhibit 3. [ 101 ] She recalled that she was sitting in the Mazda when she heard a noise.

She looked in the side mirror and opened the door and saw what was happening. She ran out and tried to call Mr. Miller off Mr. Taylor. She said she said, “Stop Matt”. She explained that she returned to the cab of the truck to get her phone to try to call the police but she was too flustered. She then ran to the door of the store and told them to call the police. She said she heard Mr. Miller tell Mr. Taylor, “I am going to put your f-ing head through this glass.” She stated that she had a hold of Mr. Miller’s elbow and she was trying to pull his arm back. [ 102 ] She stated that somehow Mr.

Taylor got the door to the store open and fell into the store on his knees. At this point, Mr. Miller decided to leave. She stated that she went to retrieve Mr. Taylor’s hat, glasses and cigarettes which were on the ground. When she did so, Ms Venasse stated, “You’re dead. You’re f-ing gone.” [ 103 ] Ms Venasse stated that after Mr. Miller was arrested for this incident he was released on an Order not to have any contact with her “unless relevant to the children”. She identified Exhibit 5 as the Release Order she was aware of.

As I indicated, defence counsel had previously advised that the authenticity of the undertaking was admitted. [ 104 ] Crown counsel showed Ms Venasse several text messages that were marked as Exhibit 6. She stated that her messages are shown in green on the exhibit and his messages are shown in white. [ 105 ] Ms Venasse stated that Mr. Miller texted her Tuesday, May 24, at 7:56 am, “Are you going to sent people to rob and murder me don’t” (Exhibit 6, page 4). [ 106 ] Ms Venasse stated that Mr.

Miller texted her May 27, 9:22 am, “That’s great your false charges and mental instability will be to and the fact you have been abiding crimals that tryd to kill there father for money and have lied about being involved with children

services it’s not going to b good for you.” (Exhibit 6, Page 7) [ 107 ] She replied, “this is off topic of the kids. Your conditions only allow you to speak to me about the kids.” (Exhibit 6, Page 7). [ 108 ] He replied, “It not off topic it’s about the safety of my kids when your harvering fugitives. Phoning my family telling them I’m a lieir is a breach of conditions I wanted to help and you want to fight just leave me along then my grama sick doesn’t want your dreams leave her alone”. (Exhibit 6, Page 7). [ 109 ] After this there are a number of exchanges in the text messages where Mr.

Miller was asking about seeing his children or “Maddy”. Ms Venasse stated that Maddy was their oldest daughter. Ms Venasse replied to each of these inquiries by stating, “leave me alone”. (Exhibit 6, Pages, 8, 9). [ 110 ] Ms Venasse stated that she was arrested for mischief in relation to the incident that occurred at Mr. Miller’s home. She stated that it was alleged that she was the one who vandalized Mr. Miller’s truck. Ms Venasse stated that she made two appearances and the Crown dropped the charges. [ 111 ] When the Crown asked how she felt about Mr. Miller, Ms Venasse stated, “Very scared”.

Cross-examination [ 112 ] Defence counsel asked Ms Venasse about other text messages that were entered into evidence as Exhibit 7. Ms Venasse agreed that there were some messages that she initiated where the children were not discussed. [ 113 ] Ms Venasse agreed that Mr. Taylor was also arrested for mischief in relation to the damage to Mr. Miller’s house and vehicle. She was not aware that Mr. Taylor’s charges were withdrawn in July 2023. [ 114 ] Ms Venasse denied that she was part of the vandalism to Mr. Miller’s vehicle and house. She denied that Ryan Taylor was involved.

She stated that she did not know Matthew Taylor. She stated that she was aware of the amount of the damage to the vehicle and the house ($28,000) because Mr. Miller told her. [ 115 ] Defence counsel showed Ms Venasse a text message to Mr. Miller, dated January 25, 2022, where she stated, “Remember that guy at the gas station a week ago that you yelled and said what is your problem????? Guess what buddy it’s yours now you should have not said that to him just so you know. Sleep well cameras or no cameras you dealt your own cards.” (Exhibit 8).

Ms Venasse stated that, “He was just making all kinds of enemies at that time.” Ms Venasse then stated that this text message related to an incident between Mr. Miller and Ryan Taylor’s brother which occurred at the Waltham Store. She denied, however, knowing anything about any connection between this text message, Ryan Taylor, or Ryan Taylor’s brother and the damage done to Mr. Miller’s home and vehicle later. [ 116 ] Ms Venasse stated that she has only met Ryan Taylor’s brother once. She also stated that she heard about the incident at the Waltham Store from Ryan Taylor. Ms Venasse denied knowing that Mr.

Miller had ever met Mr. Taylor. She stated that she was aware that Mr. Taylor stayed with Ms Labine sometimes, but he was never part of the rental transactions. [ 117 ] Ms Venasse agreed that there was one occasion where Mr. Taylor visited her at the residence she was living with Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller was not present. She recalled that Mr. Taylor came over with Ms Labine. [ 118 ] Defence counsel put to Ms Venasse that her evidence in-chief to the effect that she heard Mr. Miller tell Mr.

Taylor that he was going to put his head through the “f-ing glass” was new and not something she revealed to the police in her statement. After an adjournment to review her statement, she agreed with this proposition. [ 119 ] Ms Venasse agreed that there is no family court order in place that prevents Mr. Miller from seeing his children. She stated that the Order sets out that it was up to the children to contact him. She denied interfering in that. She agreed that Mr.

Miller had not seen the children since December 2021. [ 120 ] Ms Venasse disagreed with the suggestion that her daughter Maddy was driving her truck when the incident took place. She stated that Maddy did not yet have her driver’s licence. Assessment of the Evidence of Karen Venasse [ 121 ] As with Mr. Taylor, I don’t believe much of what Ms Venasse told me that was not corroborated by the videotape or the text messaging. [ 122 ] Ms Venasse tried to portray herself as someone who had no knowledge of the incident at Mr. Miller’s home and no knowledge of the status of Mr.

Taylor’s – her boyfriend – charges related to that incident. I find this incredible. [ 123 ] The text messaging shown to her by Mr. Cleaver where she told Mr. Miller to “sleep well cameras or no cameras you dealt your own cards” and averted to Mr. Miller’s meeting with Matthew Taylor speaks volumes. She knows more than she is letting on. Evidence of Matthew Miller In-Chief [ 124 ] Matthew Miller is 41 years old. He has worked as a truck driver for 15 years. [ 125 ] On the day in question, he went to the Esso station because he wanted to get a couple of Red Bull and he thought his daughter was there.

[ 126 ] He stated that he “hardly” recognized Mr. Taylor. He stated that he did not know Ms Venasse was at the gas station. With respect to Mr. Taylor, he stated, “It was him on the run with my daughter’s truck.” I thought that this was an odd thing to say, given that he had just finished saying he did not recognize the man. [ 127 ] He stated that the point in the video where he comes forward is when he told Mr. Taylor he wanted to talk to Mr. Taylor outside about the damage to his house and his truck. [ 128 ] He denied attacking Mr. Taylor when he came outside. He stated that Mr.

Taylor grabbed him by the coat. “I guess he was ready to fight me”, he said. [ 129 ] He stated that the persons who invaded his property did $25,000 damage to his truck and $3400 to his house. He stated that he and a friend were in the garage when that incident took place. He recognized Matthew Taylor and Ryan Taylor from seeing them before through Crystal. Ryan Taylor came to his house to deliver rent. There was one other time that Taylor came to his house to drop something off for Venasse. [ 130 ] Mr. Miller stated that he found out on August 11, 2021 that Ms Venasse was involved in a relationship with Mr.

Taylor. He stated that she was also buying drugs from him. He stated that there was a “love triangle” between Venasse, Taylor and Crystal. He stated that after this, Ms Venasse moved into a rental cottage. [ 131 ] Mr. Miller stated that he last had contact with his children on September 26. He stated that his contact ended when he asked Ms Venasse about some suspicious behaviour he observed when they were using the bathroom. [ 132 ] Mr. Miller acknowledged reviewing the various text messages. He agreed that he sent some that were not child-related because he got angry.

He agreed that he and Ms Venasse started talking about the children, but then things “just spiraled”. [ 133 ] Mr. Miller stated that he had back surgery on November 2, 2021. It took him six months to recover. He was asked not to do anything strenuous. [ 134 ] He agreed that he was involved in a family court action with Ms Venasse. [ 135 ] Mr. Miller stated that he regretted what happened at the gas station. [ 136 ] He stated, however, that Mr. Taylor’s evidence that the attack was “unprovoked” was not true. Nor was it true that Mr. Taylor had not been to his house. He also stated that Mr.

Taylor’s evidence that he was not involved in a relationship with Ms Venasse before August of 2021 was not true. [ 137 ] With respect to a prior visit to his home, Mr. Miller recalled that he and Mr. Taylor had a conversation about earning “great money” working for the railway and vehicles that Mr. Miller was taking to the wrecker. [ 138 ] With respect to the incident involving Matthew Taylor at the Waltham Store, Mr. Miller stated that Matthew Taylor was there buying beer. He called Mr. Miller a “fucking goof”. Mr. Miller told him that, “He had better watch his fucking mouth.” [ 139 ] Mr.

Miller stated that it was “unbelievable” that the charges against Taylor and Venasse for damage to his house were withdrawn. Cross-examination [ 140 ] The Crown put text messages from Exhibit 6 to Mr. Miller. Mr. Miller essentially stated that he did not believe that he was in violation of the release order until page 10 when he sent Ms Venasse the poem. [ 141 ] I have a hard time understanding Mr. Miller’s logic in this regard. There are a number of entries in Exhibit 6 – at pages 4, 6, and 7 which have nothing to do with care of the children. [ 142 ] Mr.

Miller was of the view that Ms Venasse’s complaint about him breaching his conditions was “her being petty” and trying to get as many charges laid against him as she could. [ 143 ] Mr. Miller stated that when he stopped at the store, he did not initially notice the truck. He reiterated that his reason for stopping was to get the Red Bull. [ 144 ] He admitted, however, that he did see the truck there and despite the fact that he thought it might be his daughter, he did not walk over to see who was in the truck. [ 145 ] He claimed that he did not recognize Mr.

Taylor because he was masked. [ 146 ] He could not tell the Crown why he left the Red Bull, which was his reason for stopping, on the lottery display. [ 147 ] He denied pushing Mr. Taylor as soon as Mr. Taylor left the store. He also denied saying anything to Ms Venasse. Assessment of Mr. Miller’s Evidence [ 148 ] I don’t believe Mr. Miller. His evidence about the text messaging was incredible. There were clearly extracts where he was discussing matters with Ms Venasse that had nothing to do with their children, yet he steadfastly refused to admit it.

[ 149 ] His claim that he thought his daughter might be in the truck evaporated when he stated that he did not go to the truck to see if his daughter might be in it before he entered the store. [ 150 ] His evidence that he did not initially recognize Mr. Taylor is also completely unbelievable given the videotape evidence. I find that contrary to what he told me, Mr. Miller recognized Mr. Taylor as soon as or shortly after he entered the store. If he did not recognize him right away, he certainly did by the time he emerged from the back isle with is Red Bull in hand. [ 151 ] I find that Mr.

Miller put down the Red Bull because he decided to engage with Mr. Taylor. Rather than buy the Red bull, which he said was his whole intention for stopping, he allowed other patrons to come into the store and take a position on front of him in the queue. Contrary to his evidence otherwise, everything about Mr. Miller’s movements, virtually from the moment when he entered the store, had to do with planning and executing a violent confrontation with Mr. Taylor. [ 152 ] He waited for Mr. Taylor to exit. [ 153 ] I do not believe that he told Mr.

Taylor that he wanted to have a word with him outside during the brief period when both men were off the camera. Mr. Taylor’s movements as he left the store do not appear to be the movements of someone who was anticipating a confrontation outside. Given the apparent history between these two men, If Mr. Taylor was anticipating a confrontation or engaging in a consensual fight, I would have expected Mr. Taylor to be a lot more cautious in how he approached the exit door than what appears in the video. [ 154 ] When Mr. Taylor left the store, Mr. Miller attacked him immediately.

Although the “first punch” is not clearly visible on either the interior or exterior videos, the aftermath of it clearly is. Mr. Taylor can be seen being pushed up against the window of the store within one second of leaving the doorway. He clearly had no opportunity to throw the first punch as Mr. Miller said he did. I reject Mr. Miller’s claim that he was acting in self defence. [ 155 ] I do not believe Mr. Miller and his evidence does not leave me in doubt. [ 156 ] A considered and reasoned review of the videotape and the text messaging allows me to conclude his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Released: February 6, 2024 Signed: Justice J.R. Richardson