The case of a man accused of two counts of recording nudity, and one of breaking and entering, has been stayed as a Vancouver Provincial Court judge ruled the case had taken too long and violated the accused’s rights.
The specific right Judge Reginald Harris cited in the case of Amit Fein, 35, was the right to be tried within a reasonable time.
The March 13 decision came after what is known as a Jordan application, a request to the court made in accordance with a Supreme Court of Canada decision.
Under that decision, stays of proceedings are possible if a case hits a ceiling of 18 months for those tried in the provincial court and 30 months for cases in superior courts.
Charges against Fein were sworn Sept. 21, 2021.
It was alleged Fein broke into a Vancouver home in October 2019.
It was further alleged that Fein, between June 2019 and March 2020, recorded a person in a place where they could be expected to be nude, exposing their breasts or engaged in sexual activity.
A second such charge involved allegations he did the same in January 2020.
According to court documents, Fein pleaded not guilty to all three counts Dec. 12, 2022.
Guilty findings were entered on the recording nudity charges on July 4, 2024, documents said.
However, a judicial stay of proceedings was entered March 13 with the finding of the rights breach.
Obstructing police and breach convictions
The three charges were not the only allegations Fein had faced.
While Harris’ decision was delivered the afternoon of March 13, earlier in the day, Judge John Milne convicted him of obstructing police and breaching release conditions.
Milne said Fein had been at large on a release order on Sept. 22, 2023, relating to the above charges but was under surveillance by 10 Vancouver police officers.
Milne said Fein was seen going into an area from which he had been barred by a court order.
Fein was eventually challenged to stop by a handler with a dog. He fled, despite other officers calling on him to stop.
Fein was eventually taken down but continued to resist, Milne said.
The judge said Fein said he was stunned by what happened and thought people with a dog were trying to rob him. Milne called that claim “fanciful.”
“I do not accept Mr. Fein’s evidence as to how he wound up in the no-go- zone,” Milne said. “I find Mr. Fein entered the no-go area willfully or was reckless in doing so.”
Milne further rejected Fein’s assertion he did not know the dog handler was a police officer.
A date for sentencing is due to be confirmed soon.
