A Toronto man facing multiple counts of attempted murder for an alleged drive-by shooting in Scarborough is back in jail after a judge found that a justice of the peace was wrong to release him on bail pending his trial.
Superior Court Justice Llana Nakonechny ruled Friday that public confidence in the justice system “would be undermined” if Muhammad Ashan Naseer was allowed to remain out on bail. She also found that his release plan was weak.
The 21-year-old man is accused of randomly shooting at a group of men who had gathered in a parking lot following Ramadan prayers just after 1 a.m. in April 2022. Five men were injured and taken to hospital. One was shot in the back, another suffered a bullet through his spine, injuring his liver and fracturing his ribs, and a third man was hit in the leg and required knee surgery. The two other men suffered abrasions from bullets grazing them.
Justice of the Peace Rhonda Roffey released Naseer on bail in November after noting he has no criminal record, is a member of a racialized community and was proposing a strong release plan in which he would live under house arrest with his parents, who stood to lose $200,000 if they failed to ensure their son’s compliance with his bail conditions. Naseer would also wear a GPS ankle bracelet.
The Crown requested that the Superior Court review Roffey’s decision. Nakonechny said Friday that the release plan was in fact not strong, and that it was unclear how Roffey reached that conclusion. She ordered Naseer back to jail.
The judge said she was concerned that neither of Naseer’s parents “has a realistic view of the severity of the criminal charges against their son.” She said the allegations against Naseer represent “extremely reckless, brazen behaviour. Neither of the parents seem overly concerned by this.”
She noted that they had little involvement with their son in the years prior to his arrest, didn’t seem “well informed” about his personal life, and had barely spoken to him about the alleged offences. This led her to doubt that they would be able to exert any authority over Naseer while he’s out on bail.
“While they are well-meaning, I find that Mr. Naseer’s parents are not in a position to control their son’s movements and actions and ensure compliance with his bail terms,” the judge said. “Even with GPS monitoring, I find the plan is not sufficient to control Mr. Naseer if he decided to wilfully disregard the bail terms.”
You might be interested in
Not only should Naseer be detained because of the weakness of his bail plan, but also to preserve public confidence in the justice system, Nakonechny said.
“The public is understandably concerned by the increase in random gun violence and violent attacks against strangers in public settings. The prevalence of guns in Toronto, and this particular type of random drive-by attack, are worrisome and not acceptable to the public,” she said.
“I find that the public confidence in the administration of justice would be undermined if Mr. Naseer was released.”
Dressed in a navy-blue suit, Naseer was permitted to hug his father goodbye in the public gallery of the courtroom before being handcuffed and taken back to jail, where he will await his trial set for the fall.
Naseer’s case offers a rare glimpse into how a decision is reached on bail, as these hearings are almost always covered by a publication ban intended to protect an accused person’s fair trial rights until the conclusion of the criminal case. There was no publication ban requested at Naseer’s bail hearing in November.
Defence lawyer Humza Hussain did attempt to have a ban imposed Friday but Crown attorney Cara Sweeny argued that he was “trying to put the genie back in the bottle,” given that no ban was requested at the bail hearing and the Star had already reported on it. The judge agreed, and she declined to order a ban.
Toronto police said upon Naseer’s arrest that there was no evidence the alleged offences were hate-related. No motive or connection to the victims has been established.
Sweeny argued at Naseer’s bail hearing in November that there was a “substantial likelihood” he would commit a serious offence if released. Naseer’s parents put themselves forward as sureties, meaning they promised the court they would ensure their son’s compliance with his bail conditions. While finding that there is “substantive evidence” supporting the allegations against Naseer and that there is “some confusion” about where his family lives, Roffey decided to release him in November after concluding that his release plan was sufficient to mitigate any risk.
“It is not clear to me how JP Roffey reached this conclusion,” Nakonechny said Friday.
“I can only infer that JP Roffey used the GPS monitoring, financial pledge, and house arrest to bolster the proposed sureties’ apparent lack of authority over their son.”
