A Manitoulin Island woman has been found guilty of theft after making off with a trailer by concocting a story about having bought it from the absentee owner.
A Sudbury man first bought the 10x32-foot trailer in 2002, and used it as a mobile cabin for himself on his Spring Bay property.
“He upgraded the electrical system, added baseboard heat, put in additional banks of windows and a sliding door, and equipped it with a bedroom at the back,” the court transcript says. “He also put in appliances, and a stained glass light fixture in the kitchen.”
But he was transferred to Nova Scotia in 2011, leaving the trailer behind, where it began to decay, with a leaky roof and some wood rot in the floor. The man arranged to have his neighbour in Spring Bay mow the lawn and do some basic cleanup work as he tried to sell the trailer. The neighbour had access to the keys for the structure.
After failing to sell for four years, in 2015 a man and a woman arrived at the Spring Bay location and asked to have a look. The neighbour showed them around, and gave them the owner's contact information in Nova Scotia.
Two days later, the woman came back and told the neighbour she had an agreement with the owner to buy the trailer. The neighbour took her at her word, and two other men helped her to move it off the property, with all the appliances still inside.
The woman said she was taking the trailer to Sault Ste. Marie, where she lived, but the neighbour noticed they headed towards Gore Bay.
A few days later, the owner of the trailer called his neighbour, after he had been alerted someone had taken it off his property.
“He was surprised that (the neighbour) had not called him about the sale,” the transcript says.
He then called the Ontario Provincial Police to file a complaint. Soon after, police spotted the truck that had hauled the stolen trailer away on the highway. Police stopped the truck, and questioned the driver, who had unwittingly helped the woman tow stolen property.
After being questioned by police, he called the woman he had helped. A short time after that, she called the OPP herself to complain she had bought stolen property.
She claimed that the neighbour told her he owned the trailer, that she paid $2,000 for it. The neighbour denied that accusation, and said he was just trying to help.
For the judge, it came down to whose story was more believable. A big factor for the judge was the fact the trailer had been stripped of anything of value soon after the woman 'bought' it.
“Its tow tongue had been cut off, and its tires on one side were off the rims,” the transcript says. “The windows were intact, but the fridge and stove and much of the furniture had been removed. The stove, with its oven door off, was outside serving as a makeshift set of stairs into the trailer. According to photos … much of the interior had been stripped or disassembled at some point. The exterior, without adornment or skirting, appeared dark and nondescript.”
The woman also told the truck driver she had paid $9,000 for the trailer, but told police she had agreed to pay just $2,000, although she only ended up paying $1,000. She also admitted she didn't get a receipt for the sale.
In his ruling, the judge wrote that the woman has a criminal record “containing five convictions for dishonesty.
“However, even without that criminal record, I find myself unable to accept the exculpatory evidence given by the accused,” the judge wrote. “In assessing that evidence, I found that the version of events offered by the accused was not capable of belief. I particularly noted that the accused repeatedly modified her evidence to conform with whatever new fact confronted her.”
For example, the woman initially said she and her partner each agreed to pay $1,000, and that she withdrew the money from her bank account. But she said she had no record of it, and then said it was actually $500, and her partner paid the other $500. When asked why she was changing her testimony, she questioned why that was important, since they had a joint bank account.
“This kind of shift of ground, to suit the needs of the moment, though it makes nonsense of the whole exercise of claiming $1,000 was raised individually ... seriously detracts from (her) credibility,” the judge wrote.
She also complained the fridge inside the trailer had no door on it, but also said it was mouldy from the door not being opened for so long. That contradiction, the judge wrote, supported the Crown's contention that her plan was to sell the appliances to raise extra cash.
And in claiming that the neighbour lied about being the owner of the trailer, she also accused him of “wanting to be rid of it because it was an eyesore.” Why would someone trying to sell something discount its value in front of a potential buyer, the judge asked.
“As marketing strategies go, this one flies in the face of common sense,” he wrote. “I find that the accused added the detail to her version to explain how (the neighbour) could justify asking so little money for the trailer.”
It also made little sense for the neighbour to pretend to own the trailer and sell it under false circumstances, when the real owner had property right next door and was certain to find out sooner or later.
On balance, the judge was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt the woman was guilty. However, she was convicted of theft under $5,000, owing to the condition of the trailer when it was sold to her.
