Two years after a ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ police officer and his ex-public sector girlfriend were found guilty of falsifying a will, the rightful beneficiary still hasn’t seen a dime of the $834,000 inheritance he’s due — and will now have to wait for the outcome of the pair’s appeal of their sentences.
After a four-week trial in June 2023, a jury found Robert Konashewych and Adellene Balgobin guilty of defrauding the estate of a man with whom he had no relationship, and whose financial affairs she was entrusted to manage in her capacity as an official with Ontario’s Public Guardian and Trustee (OPGT). Balgobin was also convicted of breach of trust.
The two were sentenced to seven years each in prison.
But in documents filed with the Court of Appeal for Ontario, Konashewych’s lawyers are asking that the proceedings be stayed, or a new trial ordered, citing numerous judicial errors. They include not staying the charges after finding police breached Konashewych’s Charter rights, admitting highly prejudicial evidence and delivering an “unbalanced” jury charge.
Konashewych is also asking that his sentence be reduced because it is “outside the range” of what is appropriate.
Balgobin, in written arguments filed for her appeal, is asking the province’s highest court to order a new trial, saying the trial judge’s jury charge “lacked fairness and balance and that it compromised Balgobin’s right to a fair trial.”
At trial, Balgobin testified she never shared any confidential information from OPGT with Konashewych, nor did she conspire with him to defraud the estate. She received no portion of the estate transferred to Konashewych in 2018. (Konashewych did not take the stand.)
Her lawyers argue the judge’s review of the evidence on the pivotal issue to the “alleged fabrication of the will read like a Crown closing argument, and failed to relate evidence supporting the defence position.”
In sentencing Balgobin — “a 30-year-old of good character with no prior record” — the judge imposed a “crushing” a seven-year prison that should be reduced to two to three years, her lawyers Julianna Greenspan and Brad Greenshields argue in their court filing. The Crown has not yet filed its written submissions with the court.
Both Konashewych and Balgobin are out on bail. The appeal isn’t scheduled to be heard until Nov. 18. Konashewych is suspended from the ÎÚÑ»´«Ã½ Police Service without pay; Balgobin lost her job as a senior client representative with the OPGT.
The pair were found guilty of defrauding the estate of Heinz Sommerfeld and his half-brother, Peter Stelter, his sole known beneficiary of $834,351. In his sentencing reasons, Superior Court Justice Sean Dunphy, the trial judge, called this a “very significant sum†to Stelter and his family.
“The prospect of an inheritance could have made an enormous difference in Mr. Stelter’s life that had been financially precarious since his loss of employment,†the judge wrote in his sentencing reasons in December 2023. He noted that Stelter, who testified at the trial, was then 78 — the same age as his half-brother when he died in 2017.
“Money may be fungible, but it is clear that many unique opportunities to have bettered Mr. Stelter’s life and that of his grandchildren were lost and lost forever. The recovery of the funds is important but the irreparable aspects of this and other crimes can never be reduced to so inadequate a measure as dollars and cents. This crime had a very significant impact on the victims.â€
The Stelters, who declined to be interviewed, have not received any money and have been told the case has to be settled before they do.
A key ground Konashewych is relying on in his appeal relates to an estate lawyer’s letter opened by his ex-girlfriend, Candice Dixon, after he moved out of their shared condo.
The letter disclosed that he had inherited a significant amount of money from the proceeds of the Sommerfeld estate. Dixon went to police with numerous documents, including the letter, which they relied on to obtain search warrants and production warrants leading to the fraud charges.
By using a letter subject to solicitor-client privilege, police breached Konashewych’s Charter rights, his lawyers, Michael Lacy and Marcela Ahumada, argue in their factum.
During the trial, the judge agreed the letter was presumptively privileged and therefore Konashewych’s constitutional rights were violated. But he rejected the defence request for a stay.
That was a mistake, according to Konashewych’s lawyers. During the trial, the officers testified they knew the letter was privileged, and lied under oath to the court about it, they state.Â
“This brazen conduct, which prioritizes investigative efficiency over well-entrenched protections of solicitor-client privilege, is exactly the type of conduct that is offensive to societal norms of fair play and decency.”
