Latest news with #A.M.
Lebanese Army
7 days ago
- Lebanese Army
Raid Operations and Arrest of 111 Individuals and Seizure of Weapons and Ammunition
Sunday, 25 May 2025 The LAF Command – Directorate of Orientation issued the following statement: As part of the security measures implemented by the military institution across various regions, LAF units, supported by patrols from the Intelligence Directorate, raided the residences of wanted individuals, resulting in the arrest of 55 people as follows: Raids on the residences of wanted individuals in Qasrnaba, Nahle, Brital, Hourtala, Al Khodr, Younin, Dar Al Wasiaa – Baalbek, Al Marj – West Bekaa, Bar Elias, Kfar Zabad, Al Faida, Mekseh, Qab Elias – Zahle, Kfar Kila – Marjeyoun, Al Kafaat, and Al Sfeir – Baabda, leading to the arrest of 50 citizens who were wanted for shooting. A quantity of weapons, ammunition, and equipment were seized from them. Raids on the residences of wanted individuals in Al Dora – Hermel led to the arrest of citizens (M.R.), (Z.R.), (H.R.), (S.R.), and (Kh.R.) for being wanted for involvement in smuggling and gunfire offenses. A quantity of weapons and ammunition was also seized from them. Additionally, other LAF units arrested 56 individuals as follows: Arrest of 51 Syrians at the Shadra checkpoint – Akkar for being in Lebanon without legal documents. Arrest of citizen (M.R.) at the Madfoun checkpoint – Batroun for possessing weapons and military ammunition. Arrest of citizen (A.M.) at the Wata Al Sahla checkpoint – Akkar for possessing a quantity of captagon pills. Arrest of citizens (A.H.), (A.A.), and (A.M.) in the town of Douris – Baalbek and the Wadi Darya area – Zgharta for being wanted for gunfire offenses. The seized items have been handed over, and investigations with the arrestees were initiated under the relevant judiciary's supervision.
Toronto Sun
22-05-2025
- Toronto Sun
Supreme Court of Canada to examine role of rape shield law in sexual services case
Published May 22, 2025 • 2 minute read Supreme Court of Canada, Friday, March 29, 2024. Photo by Ashley Fraser / Postmedia OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada will look at the application of the rape shield law in the case of two individuals accused of acting as pimps for a woman who worked from a house they rented. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account Section 276 of the Criminal Code, known as the rape shield law, limits the use of evidence about a complainant's sexual history in court proceedings. The law is intended to avoid 'twin-myth' reasoning — the idea that a complainant's prior behaviour makes them more likely to have consented to the alleged sexual activity, or less worthy of being believed. Two individuals, identified only as A.M. and M.P. due to a publication ban, faced human trafficking and sexual services offences arising out of their relationship with the complainant, known as A.K. Section 276 requires a court to determine whether, and to what extent, evidence about a complainant's sexual history may be admissible when the court is hearing a case about one or more of 14 different offences. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. A.M. and M.P. were acquitted of human trafficking but were convicted of advertising, procuring and receiving material benefit from sexual services. None of the offences with which the two individuals were charged are listed in section 276, and they argued on appeal that the trial judge erred in applying the provision to the proceedings. They said their cross-examination of A.K. was improperly restricted and that evidence relevant to their defences was redacted from A.K.'s preliminary inquiry testimony. A.M. and M.P. contended there were no privacy or dignity concerns with the evidence, as they were not relying on the sexual nature of A.K.'s activities. Rather, they said they were concerned with how she conducted the financial and advertising aspects of her work in the past and during the time she was involved with them. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed their appeal and ordered a new trial on the sexual services offences. In its decision last year, the Court of Appeal said the evidence in question sought to counter the Crown's portrayal of A.K. 'as a vulnerable woman brought into the sex trade because of a drug dependency, and instead suggested that she sought out the appellants to improve her financial circumstances in part to feed her dependency.' The Crown then took its case to the Supreme Court. Following its usual practice, the top court gave no reasons for agreeing Thursday to hear the matter. No date for a hearing has been scheduled. Tennis World Basketball Sports Columnists
CTV News
22-05-2025
- CTV News
Supreme Court of Canada to examine role of rape shield law in sexual services case
The shadow from a Royal Canadian Air Force CC-330 Husky is seen as it passes the Supreme Court of Canada on Canada Day on Monday, July 1, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang OTTAWA — The Supreme Court of Canada will look at the application of the rape shield law in the case of two individuals accused of acting as pimps for a woman who worked from a house they rented. Section 276 of the Criminal Code, known as the rape shield law, limits the use of evidence about a complainant's sexual history in court proceedings. The law is intended to avoid 'twin-myth' reasoning — the idea that a complainant's prior behaviour makes them more likely to have consented to the alleged sexual activity, or less worthy of being believed. Two individuals, identified only as A.M. and M.P. due to a publication ban, faced human trafficking and sexual services offences arising out of their relationship with the complainant, known as A.K. Section 276 requires a court to determine whether, and to what extent, evidence about a complainant's sexual history may be admissible when the court is hearing a case about one or more of 14 different offences. A.M. and M.P. were acquitted of human trafficking but were convicted of advertising, procuring and receiving material benefit from sexual services. None of the offences with which the two individuals were charged are listed in section 276, and they argued on appeal that the trial judge erred in applying the provision to the proceedings. They said their cross-examination of A.K. was improperly restricted and that evidence relevant to their defences was redacted from A.K.'s preliminary inquiry testimony. A.M. and M.P. contended there were no privacy or dignity concerns with the evidence, as they were not relying on the sexual nature of A.K.'s activities. Rather, they said they were concerned with how she conducted the financial and advertising aspects of her work in the past and during the time she was involved with them. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed their appeal and ordered a new trial on the sexual services offences. In its decision last year, the Court of Appeal said the evidence in question sought to counter the Crown's portrayal of A.K. 'as a vulnerable woman brought into the sex trade because of a drug dependency, and instead suggested that she sought out the appellants to improve her financial circumstances in part to feed her dependency.' The Crown then took its case to the Supreme Court. Following its usual practice, the top court gave no reasons for agreeing Thursday to hear the matter. No date for a hearing has been scheduled. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 22, 2025 Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press
Winnipeg Free Press
22-05-2025
- Winnipeg Free Press
Supreme Court of Canada to examine role of rape shield law in sexual services case
OTTAWA – The Supreme Court of Canada will look at the application of the rape shield law in the case of two individuals accused of acting as pimps for a woman who worked from a house they rented. Section 276 of the Criminal Code, known as the rape shield law, limits the use of evidence about a complainant's sexual history in court proceedings. The law is intended to avoid 'twin-myth' reasoning — the idea that a complainant's prior behaviour makes them more likely to have consented to the alleged sexual activity, or less worthy of being believed. Two individuals, identified only as A.M. and M.P. due to a publication ban, faced human trafficking and sexual services offences arising out of their relationship with the complainant, known as A.K. Section 276 requires a court to determine whether, and to what extent, evidence about a complainant's sexual history may be admissible when the court is hearing a case about one or more of 14 different offences. A.M. and M.P. were acquitted of human trafficking but were convicted of advertising, procuring and receiving material benefit from sexual services. None of the offences with which the two individuals were charged are listed in section 276, and they argued on appeal that the trial judge erred in applying the provision to the proceedings. They said their cross-examination of A.K. was improperly restricted and that evidence relevant to their defences was redacted from A.K.'s preliminary inquiry testimony. A.M. and M.P. contended there were no privacy or dignity concerns with the evidence, as they were not relying on the sexual nature of A.K.'s activities. Rather, they said they were concerned with how she conducted the financial and advertising aspects of her work in the past and during the time she was involved with them. The Ontario Court of Appeal allowed their appeal and ordered a new trial on the sexual services offences. In its decision last year, the Court of Appeal said the evidence in question sought to counter the Crown's portrayal of A.K. 'as a vulnerable woman brought into the sex trade because of a drug dependency, and instead suggested that she sought out the appellants to improve her financial circumstances in part to feed her dependency.' The Crown then took its case to the Supreme Court. Following its usual practice, the top court gave no reasons for agreeing Thursday to hear the matter. No date for a hearing has been scheduled. This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 22, 2025.
Yahoo
31-03-2025
- Yahoo
POLICE NEWS: Two injured in three-vehicle crash
Two people were injured in a three-vehicle crash at Ind. 13 and C.R. 10 at 4:06 p.m. Friday. According to a report from the Elkhart County Sheriff's Office, a 2007 Toyota Rav 4 driven by a 17-year-old Bristol girl, who police only identified as A.M., was northbound on Ind. 13 when it collided with the rear of a stopped 2014 Cadillac Escalade. The Escalade was driven by Terry Costner, 53, Nappanee. It, in turn, collided with the rear of a 2003 Ford Explorer Sport driven by Brett Hoover, 38, New Paris, which was stopped because a vehicle in front of it was turning. The 17-year-old Bristol girl and her passenger, Jennifer Bell, 38, New Paris, both complained of pain. Officers did not state if any medical treatment was required. Neither Hoover nor Costner reported any injuries at the scene. Runaway horse damages vehicle A runaway horse and buggy in the parking lot of Menard's, 1925 Lincolnway East, Goshen, struck a parked truck causing minor damage at 10:42 a.m. Saturday, according to a report from Goshen police. THEFTS • A firearm was stolen from the vehicle of a 30-year-old Goshen woman sometime within the past three weeks while at 61108 C.R. 17, Goshen, according to Goshen police. BATTERY • A 29-year-old Elkhart man reported to Goshen police at 8:45 p.m. Saturday that he was battered by someone he knows int he 300 block of Oakridge Avenue. The victim was injured and required medical treatment, police reported. ARRESTS • A 39-year-old Goshen woman was arrested by Goshen police at 1 a.m. Sunday on a charge of operating a vehicle while intoxicated following a traffic stop in the 1000 block of Sedgefield Way. She was taken to the Elkhart County Jail. • A 19-year-old man was arrested by Goshen police at 1:02 a.m. Saturday on charges of underage drinking and criminal recklessness after officers were called to Brookside Manor, 61108 C.R. 17, to investigate the sound of gunfire.
