Newly-retained defence counsel for convicted Haliburton County sex offender Paul Gregory Watson has asked for a new trial after alleging the Ontario judge who presided over court proceedings last year erred by not considering testimony from three “key” witnesses, including Watson.

Watson was found guilty of sexual assault and unlawfully entering a dwelling following an incident at an elderly neighbour’s house in Algonquin Highlands in February 2021.

At sentencing in November 2023, an Oshawa courtroom heard how Watson entered his neighbour’s home in the early hours of Feb. 17, making several sexual advances. When rebuffed, Watson persisted, exposing himself while expressing his fondness for the victim and touching her over a nightgown, before leaving.

Justice Russell Wood handed down a 90-day jail sentence, which Watson has been serving on weekends, nine months of house arrest and two years’ probation.

The case was back in court Aug. 16, with Toronto-based criminal defence attorney Mindy Caterina appealing last year’s conviction, while Rebecca Griffin, representing the Crown, filed a separate appeal seeking a longer sentence. It was heard by Myrna L. Lack of the Superior Court of Justice.

Caterina said during last year’s trial, Wood rejected evidence provided by Watson and his wife, Michelle, and a character assessment submitted by the man who purchased the property from the elderly neighbour following the incident.

She noted Watson and the elderly neighbour were familiar with each other, with him often completing chores on her property. In 2017, the Watsons stayed with the neighbour for three months while their home was being renovated.

In his evidence, Watson said he was walking his dog late at night when he noticed smoke coming from the victim’s chimney. Caterina said this worried him, since he’d earlier recommended, on a previous visit, that his neighbour not use her fireplace due to a dangerous build-up of creosote – a highly flammable tar-like substance containing toxic chemicals that can be harmful if inhaled.

Caterina said Watson entered the home through a side studio door, leaving his dog in a porch, before proceeding to wake the neighbour. She said the neighbour asked Watson to leave, which Caterina claims Watson did without incident.

“The first reason the trial judge gives for rejecting the appellant’s evidence was that [he] concocted his narrative after the fact in an attempt to mirror the complainant’s testimony, but with an innocent explanation. The Court of Appeal instructs that as an illegal inference,” Caterina said.

“Additionally, [the judge] committed four material misapprehensions of evidence, which bore on his credibility analysis.”

In his reasoning, Wood said, “there were many aspects to [Watson’s] explanation that defy common sense.” The judge thought it “bizarre” Watson would enter the home uninvited in the middle of the night due to a safety concern, only to immediately leave without rectifying the issue after waking the victim.

Caterina cited a 2020 sexual assault case, where a conviction was overturned because the presiding judge was found to have ignored the accused’s constitutional rights when refusing testimony after believing it was structured to meet the allegations faced. She feels this establishes a clear precedent.

Lack seemed to reject that thought, telling Caterina, “he says ‘I don’t believe the guy.’ And fair enough.” From her perspective, Lack felt Wood was within his rights to reject Watson’s version and convict based on the victim’s testimony.

Caterina cast doubt on the victim’s testimony, saying she seemed to have problems with her memory. She cited the victim’s uncertainty over when her fireplace was last serviced, and when phone calls to book the service took place, as reasons to question her evidence.

Crown response

Griffin noted, during the trial, Watson “deflected continuously” and changed parts of his story when pushed by Wood to answer why he felt compelled to enter the house.

The Crown prosecutor felt Caterina’s claims of misapprehension of evidence – surrounding the events leading up to the incident – held little weight.

“The evidence is clear that Watson did not have an open invitation to enter [the victim’s] house, certainly not in the middle of the night. If he was concerned… the more obvious option would be to return home and call [the victim] on the phone. If he felt it was a more urgent emergency, why enter through a studio door in such a secretive way? Why not go directly to the front door, or window, loudly?” Griffin said.

The prosecutor didn’t have time to address her sentencing appeal.

With the day drawing to a close, Lack said another hearing would be required to hear the Crown’s appeal.

“I’ve been a judge of this court for 26 years and I have never had a sentence appeal yet, so I really want to hear this,” Lack said, noting a decision on both appeals will be made after. Watson is due to complete his sentence Dec. 17.

Algonquin Highlands council is again kicking tires on reducing the number of days residents can set off fireworks in the township.

At an Aug. 15 meeting, environmental manager Melissa Murray released results from a monthslong survey, released on the ‘Bang the Table’ forum and distributed to all local lake associations, asking the public’s opinion on firework use. There were 520 respondents, with 65 per cent saying the pyrotechnics should be completely banned.

In 2020, the township limited the number of days fireworks can be used to five – for Canada Day, Victoria Day, New Year’s Eve, the August Civic Holiday, and Labour Day.

Coun. Lisa Barry said she felt fireworks have lost their spark and, for environmental concerns alone, would be in favour of scaling back.

“They’ve become used so often that they’re no longer spectacular. You’ll hear them on a Tuesday night in the middle of June for no apparent reason,” Barry said.

Coun. Julia Shortreed suggested limiting fireworks to twice yearly – suggesting Canada Day and the Civic Holiday. In the survey, 317 of 411 respondents said they’re in favour of fireworks on Canada Day, with 167 wanting to maintain New Year’s Eve, 86 for Victoria Day, 69 for Civic Holiday, and 24 for Labour Day.

Deputy mayor Jennifer Dailloux asked that council consider banning fireworks on Victoria Day, with May a key month for bird migration and nesting seasons.

“Environmentally, that is the worst time you can put on a fireworks display,” Dailloux said. Commenting on the survey results, she added, “there’s clearly an appetite for change.”

But Coun. Sabrina Richards disagrees. With the township’s summer population estimated at about 8,000 people, she believes implementing changes based on the thoughts of fewer than 10 per cent of residents would be a mistake. She said council needs more data from taxpayers, and experts, to make an informed decision.

“I haven’t gotten enough evidence to see if that is a thing, if fireworks impact bird patterns,” Richards said, responding to Dailloux. “We’ve been lighting fireworks for over 100 years.”

Danielsen warned that even if the township clamps down on firework use, it’ll be difficult to punish violators. She said, in most cases, by the time the township is able to respond to a complaint, the fireworks are over. For someone to be issued a ticket, there needs to be proof clearly showing someone setting off fireworks, with a date and time stamp.

CAO Angie Bird said the township received seven fireworks-related complaints in 2023, but none so far this year.

Dysart et al, Highlands East, and Minden Hills all allow fireworks on Canada Day, Victoria Day, New Year’s Eve, the August Civic Holiday, and Labour Day. There have been calls to limit them – Susan Hay, representing Environment Haliburton! last year called on the County to ban all personal displays and fireworks sales in the Highlands.

Hay said fireworks are toxic, put aquatic health at risk, cause extreme stress in birds, wildlife and pets, reduce quality of life for people, and add to greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution. She noted most fireworks are imported from China, without restrictions on materials being used. Chemicals such as perchlorate, strontium, copper, titanium, barium, rubidium, cadmium, chlorine, and lead can irritate lungs and eyes, she said.

They can also be a significant fire hazard, with Hay saying sources suggest 20,000 to 30,000 fires are started each year due to fireworks.

Council agreed to extend its fireworks survey for another couple of months, giving residents until Oct. 31 to have their voices heard.

To take the survey, visit letsconnectalgonquinhighlands.ca.

Minden Hills council, at its Aug. 8 meeting, did not finalize what to do with short-term rentals on unowned shore road allowances.

Manager of the planning department, Amanda Dougherty, brought back a report after council sought clarification on what to do with STRs operating where they do not own the shore road allowance. She said all structures required a license of occupation, not just where people were staying and sleeping, but for things such as docks.

Coun. Tammy McKelvey said she thought they were only going to make people do licences of occupation, with an intent to purchase, if the actual building being slept in for the STR is on the shore road allowance.

“I think we’re adding a lot of cost here to a short-term rental… I was only willing to do this if the actual building they’re sleeping in was there,” she said.

Mayor Bob Carter said the County sought a legal opinion, and were told they should include other structures.

McKelvey said she didn’t think it was right if just a dock or gazebo were on the allowance.

Bylaw officer Paula Ingram said she preferred including any building or structure for liability reasons. Dougherty said Algonquin Highlands is dwelling-only, Dysart “all buildings” and Highlands East “all buildings and structures.”

In a recorded vote, council defeated the all buildings and structures option (McKelvey, councillors Ivan Ingram, Shirley Johannessen and Bob Sisson voted against).

The bylaw officer said they could change to dwelling-only, but there is liability with structures adjacent to the water. She added the insurance portion of it could change to “if there’s any structures on our shore road allowance… the certificate of insurance has to be on all buildings.”

Coun. Pam Sayne supported that change, saying the wording could protect the municipality from a lawsuit. “We are not going to be responsible for peoples’ guests on their docks.”

McKelvey said the municipality could be added as an insurer for other buildings and structures. Dougherty said they could also charge a $150 license of occupation fee for other buildings and structures.

McKelvey was in favour.

Sayne would have preferred keeping it as originally presented, for all buildings. “If you have a short-term rental, it’s considered a business, and so you have to invest in that business and protect your interests. Our municipality shouldn’t be taking the load off of those businesses with our revenues and our liabilities… so there’s a lot of good reasons for not only the STR people to purchase that property, but also for that to be purchased so the municipality isn’t liable.” Staff will go back and amend the bylaw and return to a future meeting.