Teen seriously injured in collision between vehicle and scooter in Markham
A teenager has been rushed to a GTA trauma centre with serious injuries following a collision in Markham.
The crash happened near 14th Avenue and the Box Grove Bypass, south of Highway 407.
York Regional Police said they were called to that area just after 8:30 p.m. for a collision involving a vehicle and a scooter.
Currently, eastbound 14th is closed at Box Grove Bypass. Southbound Box Grove Bypass at 14th is also off limits, as is Box Grove Bypass at Riverwalk Drive.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CTV News
7 minutes ago
- CTV News
Videos in hockey players' trial highlight misconceptions about consent: law experts
A composite image of five photographs show former members of Canada's 2018 World Juniors hockey team, left to right, Alex Formenton, Cal Foote, Michael McLeod, Dillon Dube and Carter Hart as they individually arrived to court in London, Ont., Tuesday, April 22, 2025. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Nicole Osborne As five former Canadian world junior hockey players await a ruling in their sexual assault trial, legal experts say videos shown in court of the complainant saying she was OK with what had happened highlight a broader misunderstanding of consent and sexual assault law in Canada. Two cellphone videos in which the woman says she's 'OK with this' and that 'it was all consensual' were presented as evidence during the trial of Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube, and Callan Foote. All five men have pleaded not guilty to sexual assault after an encounter in a London, Ont., hotel room in the early morning hours of June 19, 2018. McLeod has also pleaded not guilty to an additional charge of being a party to the offence of sexual assault. Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia is expected to deliver her ruling on Thursday in the case that saw consent emerge as a central issue. Prosecutors have argued the complainant did not voluntarily agree to the sexual acts that took place, nor did the players take reasonable steps to confirm her consent. The Crown has dismissed the videos taken of the woman that night as 'token lip service box checking,' arguing she felt she had no choice but to go along when a group of men she didn't know started asking her to do things inside the hotel room. Defence lawyers, meanwhile, repeatedly challenged the complainant's credibility and reliability as a witness, arguing she was an active participant in the sexual activity and made up the allegations because she didn't want to take responsibility for her choices that night. Video statements such as the short clips shown in this trial aren't necessarily evidence of consent, said University of Ottawa law professor Daphne Gilbert. 'Legally speaking, they have very little relevance because consent has to be ongoing and contemporaneous with the sexual activity and you have to be consenting to every single thing that is happening to you,' said Gilbert, who researches sexual violence and abuse in Canadian sports. 'There's no such thing as advance consent. And there's no thing as after-the-fact consent, either. So just because you say, 'Yeah, it was all consensual' doesn't mean that makes it so.' Lisa Dufraimont, a law professor at York University, said such videos could also be seen as hearsay because they don't contain statements made under oath in court. 'If the complainant got on the stand at the trial and testified that they consented at the time, that would be evidence that they consented at the time,' said Dufraimont, whose research focuses on evidence issues in sexual assault cases. But she said the videos could be used for other legal arguments, including those that may rely on a description of how a defendant or complainant was acting at the time. 'It may be that if the video is taken close in time to the alleged sexual assault, that the video shows something about the person's level of intoxication or their emotional state, which may or may not be consistent with what they later reported their emotional state was at the time,' said Dufraimont. During the trial, the Crown argued that the videos shown in court weren't proof that the complainant voluntarily agreed to what had taken place. 'The recording of that video is not getting her consent to anything. Everything's already happened,' prosecutor Meaghan Cunningham said about the video in which the woman said it was 'all consensual,' adding that consent must be communicated for each specific act at the time it takes place. Only one of the accused, Hart, took the stand in his own defence, and court heard or watched interviews three of the others — McLeod, Formenton and Dube — gave police in 2018. People accused of crimes are not required to testify, nor is the defence required to call any evidence, as it is up to the Crown to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In McLeod's 2018 interview with police, he told a detective that he recorded one of the videos because he was 'just kind of worried something like this might happen.' On the stand, Hart testified that consent videos aren't unusual for professional athletes. Gilbert, the University of Ottawa law professor, said Canada in general still has work to do in educating young people about consent, especially in sports. She's involved in efforts to teach youth about consent through school programming, but said professional hockey in particular is behind on enacting policies to address the issue. Consent should be 'enthusiastic, affirmative, ongoing, coherent' — yes means yes, said Gilbert. 'I think people don't understand that that's actually what the law requires. And so if you know that, if you think about that as the way that we should approach consent, then I think it's easier to understand why those videos don't mean much.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 22, 2025. Rianna Lim, The Canadian Press
CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
Dismantlement of homeless encampment on Notre-Dame Street delayed until late August
A homeless encampment along Notre-Dame Street was spared from another eviction on Monday. A judge ruled the encampment cannot be dismantled before Aug. 27 and prohibited the Ministry of Transport (MTQ), which owns the land, from cleaning up the area where the shelter and people's belongings are located. City officials can intervene, however, if the tents and other structures are located less than three metres from the bike path, less than 15 metres from an entrance to Morgan Park or are leaning on a fence. The City of Montreal took note of the decision. 'However, we would like to reiterate that City teams, in close collaboration with community and government partners, are actively continuing their work in the field. Psychosocial support for people experiencing homelessness is being maintained and remains a constant priority,' the city said in an email to Noovo Info. The Clinique juridique itinérante (CJI) obtained a previous injunction on June 30 preventing the MTQ and the City of Montreal from evicting those camping there until at least July 10. During the legal proceedings, lawyers argued that an eviction would cause those living there serious harm and shouldn't be done when shelters are overflowing. Lawyers for the City of Montreal and the MTQ, on the other hand, said there are safety issues associated with the camp, like the building of permanent structures, an increase in the number of tents and frequent interventions by police and the fire department. With files from CTV News' Max Harrold and Noovo Info
CBC
2 hours ago
- CBC
Zoom-bombing concerns prompt Ontario to halt full public access to virtual court
Social Sharing An increasing number of Zoom bombings infiltrating Ontario courtrooms now means the public is banned from attending proceedings virtually. On Wednesday, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Katie Wood sent a memo to court staff across the province saying "the public will not be permitted to observe proceedings virtually." "If the public would like to attend, they will be required to do so in person," the memo said. Virtual court hearings became commonplace during the COVID-19 pandemic that set in over five years ago, and since then, more concerns have been raised about Zoom bombings. Typically, it's when participants in a video conferencing meeting have had their screens hijacked by someone who's placed words and images on the screen or disrupted the call's audio. Wood's memo noted there's been a notable rise in "Zoom-bombing incidents ... involving offensive content and targeted behaviour that have disrupted court proceedings." Gytis Pabedinskas, a Windsor defence lawyer, has been in court on two occasions when Zoom bombers appeared. "When the account went in, it started playing a pornographic [video] as well as had some audio playing where it was calling the judge an N-word," said Pabedinskas. Even though these incidents are disturbing, local defence lawyer Laura Joy said the courts could have better utilized technology to prevent interruptions instead of instituting a virtual ban for the public. "I understand why they're doing it, but I'm very hopeful that everybody will keep in mind the fundamental cornerstone of Canadian justice is transparency and open courts to the public," said Joy. Concerns over removing public virtual access Noel Semple, an associate professor in the University of Windsor's faculty of law, also said removing the public's virtual access to courtrooms is problematic. "The open court principle is quite foundational in the Canadian legal system. Justice is not supposed to be in private, in darkened back rooms. It's supposed to be done in public. We should be doing everything we can to honour that principle." Victims or complainants who want to appear virtually for their court matters must seek prior approval, Wood's memo says. The media also must get permission before observing court virtually. The memo goes on to warn court staff about "Zoom bomber tactics," such as them posing as correctional institutions, interpreters or even police departments. In a statement, a spokesperson for the Ministry of the Attorney General noted the observer policy is available online and members of the public are permitted to attend court, in person. 'Come on down to the courthouse' Defence lawyer Linda McCurdy applauds Zoom access being removed for observers. McCurdy has been practising law for nearly 30 years, while virtual court only materialized in recent years. "I don't view it at all as restricting or taking away something," she said about Wood's announcement. "It's making sure that the court process is protecting from the kind of stuff that's going on. "If you want to participate, if you want to view, come on down to the courthouse," she added. Since the pandemic, she's seen formalities slip. McCurdy said she's been in court when witnesses attending virtually are laying in bed or walking their dog, or an observer was heard going to the bathroom. "They don't really take it seriously."
