Mistrial for man found guilty of sexually assaulting teenaged girl

A mistrial has been declared after a man found guilty of sexually assaulting a teenaged girl received “incompetent representation” from his Legal Aid lawyer, a judge has ruled.

While the man’s lawyer was blamed for the miscarriage of justice, NWT Territorial Court Judge Robert Gorin in his recent decision also detailed a serious mistake made by the Crown and the accused’s own poor behaviour as a client.

NWT resident Oliver Weyallon was found guilty by Judge Gorin in July 2025 of sexually assaulting the victim, whose identity is protected by a publication ban.

However, Weyallon wasn’t originally informed of his right to a jury trial in NWT Supreme Court, since the Crown failed in a timely fashion to note the girl was under the age of 16.

With the girl actually being 15 at the time of the offence, it changed the options open to the defence and the Crown — including the choice of a jury trial and harsher possible penalties if found guilty.

Once it was discovered the girl was only 15, Weyallon’s lawyer — who isn’t named in Judge Gorin’s decision — failed to effectively work with her client to determine if he should change his selection of trial by Territorial Court judge alone.

So, his new lawyer, Robert LaValley, asked for a mistrial on the basis of ineffective counsel.

He argued, among other things, that the original lawyer:

• Failed to adequately seek Weyallon’s instructions on his election of mode of trial;
• failed to utilize text messages provided to her by the accused; and
• that she failed to adequately cross-examine the victim on substantial inconsistencies between her testimony and statements she had previously made to the police.

Judge Gorin was also “disturbed by former counsel’s lack of adequate note taking when interacting with Mr. Weyallon,” and that she failed to turn over some of the limited materials she did have to her former client’s new lawyer when he requested them.

“To a large extent Mr. Weyallon created a problem by being non-responsive to former counsel’s emails and meeting late with her,” wrote the judge, calling the man’s behaviour “irresponsible.”

Advertisement

Wrote the judge: “To be clear, as late as March 19th, due to the way the charges against Mr. Weyallon were particularized and the redaction of the complainant’s date of birth from Crown’s disclosure material, Crown counsel, defence counsel, and as a consequence even the court, were operating under the assumption that (the alleged victim) was 16 years old at the time of the allegations.

“It was not until May 13th, that the (Crown Prosecutor), who had now become aware of (the alleged victim’s) age, advised defence counsel, among other things, that (she) “was only 15 at the time.” As noted, this was after Mr. Weyallon had elected to be tried in the Territorial Court. This Court had to wait to the date of trial before being so apprised.

“Based on the evidence, I find Mr. Weyallon’s lawyer appears not to have asked Mr. Weyallon if he wished to re-elect based on the changes in jeopardy and procedural rights that had occurred after she was made aware of them.

“In my view, prior counsel’s failure to again seek his instructions on a possible re-election amounted to ineffective representation and is sufficient to declare a mistrial.”