Child sex abuse case collapses over delay. For years, Toronto police did nothing to find man charged with sexual interference of daughter - Toronto Star

“If police had taken any steps to locate him, he would have immediately been brought back before the court. They did not.”

When a man failed to appear in court in November 2017 on a charge of sexual interference involving his young daughter, Toronto police knew exactly where to find him.

The man was out on bail living with his grandmother, a 20-minute drive from the courthouse. Her address and phone number were in the possession of the cops, as were the address and phone number of the accused’s mother, and the phone number of the man himself. 

Yet despite a judge issuing a warrant for the man’s arrest, there’s no evidence police ever went to either home, nor that they called any of the numbers.

Meanwhile, the man, having been informed by mail that he had missed a court date, went to the courthouse and then a police station, only to be told there appeared to be no record of a warrant and that he should just go home.

The man went on with his life, always residing in the GTA. Fast forward to May 2025, and the man was returning from a vacation overseas when border officers at Pearson airport saw the outstanding warrant for his arrest in their system. The case against him was revived. 

In July, the Crown took the rare step of agreeing with the defence that the case should be stayed for violating the accused man’s constitutional right to a trial within a reasonable time.

The Star is not naming the man, who denies the allegations against him, as it would identify his daughter, whose identity is covered by a publication ban.

The man “did not flee the jurisdiction. He was not actively evading justice. He simply missed his court date,” said written arguments filed by defence lawyers Chris Rudnicki and Ranya El-Sharkawi.

“If police had taken any steps to locate him, he would have immediately been brought back before the court. They did not.”

The Supreme Court of Canada ruled in a landmark case known as R v. Jordan that cases in Superior Court must be completed within 30 months, otherwise, they must be tossed unless the Crown can show there were exceptional circumstances for the delay. Delays on the side of the defence are deducted from the overall calculation.

Typically, delay resulting from an accused failing to attend court would fall on the defence. But the courts have recognized an exception: where the police “fail to exercise due diligence” in executing an arrest warrant.

The teacher maintains his innocence. The practice of “stacking” trials is meant to improve the efficiency of Ontario’s courts.