B.C. court records show second charge against alleged hijacker Shaheer Cassim
B.C. online court records say a charge of damaging or interfering with a navigation system was sworn Friday against Shaheer Cassim.
Cassim was arrested July 15 after allegedly threatening a flight instructor at Victoria International Airport, seizing control of a Cessna, then circling the plane over Vancouver's airport before landing and being arrested by police.
Police say the 39-year-old had an "ideological motive to disrupt airspace" and announced a charge of hijacking the day after the flight.
Both charges carry a maximum sentence of life in prison.
Cassim is a former commercial airline pilot who posted on social media the day before the airport security scare that he was a "messenger of Allah" sent to save humanity from catastrophic climate change.
Cassim is expected to appear in Provincial Court in Richmond, B.C., on Tuesday.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 21, 2025.
The Canadian Press
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
What Canada can learn from Australia on adequately protecting citizens at live events
In April 2025, a man drove an SUV through a crowd of people attending a Filipino cultural festival in Vancouver, killing 11 people and injuring dozens more. In response, the British Columbia government immediately commissioned an inquiry to examine the systemic causes of the incident and whether any lessons could be learned from the tragedy. Read more: The commission came up with six recommendations based on gaps in the current municipal application and approval system for public events across the province. One key recommendation was that all public events should be required to complete a risk assessment. This isn't currently happening across the province. The absence of such analysis poses a risk for public safety. Another recommendation was the creation of local knowledge capacity to support event organizers, particularly for small and rural events, where the expertise to conduct a basic security risk assessment is lacking. Forseeable tragedy As I argued in August 2022, the live events industry lacks the same level of professionalism as other occupations. Many of these small event organizers are amateurs who lack the resources to properly deal with the security risks involved in holding their events. Read more: These factors, combined with emerging security risks, meant that the tragedy at the Lapu Lapu festival could be considered a foreseeable event given the risk realities associated with modern mass gatherings. The inquiry report highlighted how B.C. is lagging behind other international jurisdictions in terms of legislative pro-activeness in securing public events. This policy deficiency is actually a Canada-wide problem; the country is woefully behind other western nations when it comes to securing public events. My doctoral thesis examined this very issue when I compared the regulation and application process to host public events in Canada and Australia's largest cities. Australia vs. Canada Firstly, it's important to note that Canada is a less safe country in terms of security than Australia, all things considered equal. Canada's porous border with the United States means more illegal firearms are entering the country, resulting in more gun violence than in Australia, where there are more restrictive gun ownership laws. The Lapu Lapu attack was not investigated as an act of terrorism, but in a related concern, Canada's intelligence-gathering and national security laws place it at a counter-terrorism disadvantage compared to Australia. Relatively speaking, research suggests Canada's Charter of Rights and Freedoms hinders its security services from being able to detect and investigate terrorism-related offences given the greater importance placed on individual rights compared to Australia, where there is no such Charter equivalent. Australia also has pro-active foreign intelligence collection capabilities to aid in its counter-terrorism efforts, while Canada's CSIS agency only has domestic capabilities. That essentially requires it to import intelligence from its allies. Given these facts, it would seem plausible that Canada would be at greater risk for security threats at public events — including terrorist attacks, active shooters, etc. — than Australia. When I compared the data between both countries in my research, it suggested Australia has more public event regulation than Canada. It was quantitatively shown that Australian officials require risk assessments and other proactive measures from event organizers, including for risk mitigation, while Canadian officials are mostly concerned with reactive security response plans — in other words, determining how organizers would respond to attacks after they occurred. An analysis of event application documents in both countries reveal that Australian municipalities disproportionately emphasize 'risk management' in approving events compared to Canadian municipalities. Three ways the B.C. report falls short The B.C. report missed out on examining several important elements. Firstly, it did not take a holistic, deep dive into just how vulnerable public events are to myriad security threats — like active shooters, crowd crushing and terrorist attacks — but instead focused solely on the hostile vehicle threat. It also failed to consider the urgency of governments to adopt policy changes in the face of emerging threats on public spaces, like drone attacks. Secondly, the report made no mention of the need for law enforcement to develop stronger ties to share intelligence with event organizers as a proactive measure to protect mass gathering events from violence. The Hamas attacks at a music festival in Israel in October 2023 highlight the worst outcome of such failures. Read more: Lastly, there was no call for action or recommendation for the federal government to play a greater role in providing guidance to the industry and lower levels of government. National security is a federal issue as well as the regulation of airspace for drones. In countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States, the national government provides guidance on protecting public spaces. There is no such policy leadership in Canada. The B.C. findings show Canadian authorities have a lot of work to do to make public events safer for Canadians. With the FIFA World Cup coming to Canada next year, Canadian governments still have time to implement corrective actions to ensure soccer fans stay safe. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organisation bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Sean Spence, Royal Military College of Canada Read more: Calls to designate the Bishnoi gang a terrorist group shine a spotlight on Canada's security laws B.C.'s mental health law is on trial — and so is our commitment to human rights Vancouver SUV attack exposes crowd management falldowns and casts a pall on Canada's election Sean Spence provides security consulting services within the hospitality industry.
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Hockey Canada sex assault defence lawyers respond to verdict: 'Public narrative was one-sided'
Five former Canadian world junior hockey players were found not guilty in a high-profile sexual assault trial related to a 2018 incident in London, Ont. The case had sparked a national reckoning over hockey culture, and what is and what isn't considered consent. Here's how the lawyers for Michael McLeod, Carter Hart, Alex Formenton, Dillon Dube and Callan Foote reacted to Ontario Superior Court Justice Maria Carroccia's verdict, which was delivered in a London courtroom on Thursday. David Humphrey, lawyer for Michael McLeod Mr. McLeod will not be speaking to the media, and I understand the other players will not be speaking to the media. I will not be taking questions and other counsel who come to address you, they will not be taking any questions. Mr. McLeod had confidence in the Justice process, and he welcomes Justice Carrocia's decision, confirming that he and his co defendants are not guilty of sexual assault. Justice Carrocia's carefully reasoned decision represents a resounding vindication for Mr. McLeod and for his co defendants. Justice Carrocia's found that the complainant's testimony was incredible and was unreliable. For years, public perception was shaped by a one-sided narrative from a civil lawsuit that went unchallenged. In large part because hockey Canada settled the claim without first informing or consulting the players. The decision was made unilaterally, and the players were only told of the lawsuit and the settlement after the fact. Had they been consulted, they would have refused to settle, and they would have vigorously contested EM's allegations. That version of events dominated headlines and created a lasting and, a false, a false impression of guilt. It was only through this criminal trial that the allegations were fully and finally tested. The court compared the complainant's 2018 statements to the police, which rightly resulted in no charges with the later conflicting civil claim. Key elements of EM's story were contradicted by the evidence, exposing serious falsehood and leading to today's clear and just verdict of not guilty. Justice Carrocia rejected EM's claims of fear and her claims of non consent. That should be the takeaway from today's judgment. The damage to Mr. McLeod's reputation and his career has been significant. But today's decision begins to restore what was very unfairly taken away from him. Mr. McLeod is deeply grateful to his family, friends, his agent, and everybody who stood by him. Megan Savard, defence lawyer for Carter Hart It is both gratifying and unsurprising to hear an impartial and fully informed decision maker, except Mr. Hart's testimony about what happened on June 19, 2018, as unshaken, credible and truth. The public narrative of this event was, until this trial, one sided and untested. Now, the criminal process has shown it to be false. To anyone who is surprised or angered by today's outcome, it is the direct result of the media's ongoing failure to publicize the weaknesses in the prosecution's case as it unfolded. The office of the Crown attorney knew what today's verdict was likely to be. And the evidence at trial came as no surprise to them or anyone with full knowledge of the investigation. Almost every single feature of the evidence that Justice Carrocia identified today as fatal flaws for the Crown was known to prosecutors and to police from 2018. Today's outcome was not just predictable, it was predicted. The Crown attorney did not have to take this case to trial. Mr. Hart, in particular, was willing to engage in a restorative justice process. He was willing to be publicly named and prepared to use his public platform to teach other athletes about how to ensure that their sexual encounters are responsible and thoughtful. Instead of pursuing restorative justice, the Crown forced a distressing and unnecessary trial to the detriment of Mr. Hart, his co defendants, the complainant, and the Canadian public. Mr. Hart regrets that it took a criminal trial for the truth to come out, but he has learned from the experience, and he is committing to sharing what he has learned with others in his personal circle and in his professional life. He will be taking time today to process today's outcome, and is grateful to his family, his friends, and his supporters for standing by him during this profoundly challenging time. Thank you. Julianna Greenspan, lawyer for Cal Foote I promise I'm the last one. We are the last ones. Juliana Greenspan and this is Lauren Crawford, and we were counsel for Mr. Foote. Just have some brief comments that I want to say at this time. At the start of this trial, Cal Foote walked into this courthouse, an innocent man, and he walks out today exactly that. Cal never lost faith that justice would be done, despite the clamor of external pressures, and agendas, outside the courthouse doors. Criminal investigations and the trial process must always be free from these influences. On behalf of Cal and his family, we appreciate the court's careful and thorough consideration and for the just verdict delivered today. Seven years ago, Cal was 19. He is now 26. That is a significant part of a young man's life. He is still young. He has a wonderful future ahead of him, and he is eager to embark on his next chapter. Thank you. He's not answering any questions, but thank you. Daniel Brown, lawyer for Alex Formenton After what was meant to be a night of celebration with coaches and teammates. For the last seven years, he's lived under a dark cloud. The public now knows what Alex has always maintained, that he is completely innocent of this false allegation. But only after his case has erupted into a massively publicized social cause, Alex's face has appeared on millions of screens and newspaper pages, and there could be little doubt that an untold number of people out there believed he was guilty, simply because he was accused of a crime, long before any evidence was presented in court. This rush to judgment to believe the worst of people is one of the most regrettable of human traits. So, too, is our reluctance to change that opinion, even when it's proven wrong, after a full and fair trial. Notwithstanding Justice Carrocia's unequivocal exoneration of Alex today, there will inevitably be those who will still believe he committed a crime. Nobody in Room 209 that night has emerged unscarred from these events. The criminal court process is a bruising experience for everyone, but never more than when a case is high profile incorporates such high stakes. In Alex's case, he was condemned and felt banished from society. This experience for him has been crushing. Nonetheless, the impact of this case has changed Alex as a person, and he's matured well beyond his years. It is inevitable that some people will not forgive Alex for what he was accused of doing. Others, however, will understand that this tragic matter, rightly comes to an end today. Alex has never minimized his role in the sexual encounter or denied engaging in consensual sexual activity with the complainants. He fully cooperated with the police investigation and provided investigators with a complete account of his behaviour back in 2018. Alex's narrative isn't conjecture. His police statement was corroborated at trial by several crown witnesses, by video evidence, and was even supported in large measure by the complainant's evidence herself. Even Justice Carrocia said today that she accepted that Alex told the truth in that police statement. And while no police investigation is perfect, the London police got it right seven years ago when they decided it would be a mistake to charge Alex. The evidence always demonstrated that he didn't commit sexual assaults. However, political and media pressure brought this allegation back into the spotlight in 2022, and the Crown attorney knowingly forged ahead with a hopeless prosecution. Besides the human toll of everyone involved, this lengthy legal process exhausted valuable resources that could have been deployed elsewhere in the justice system, but were lost here. Alex, his family, and his defense team are grateful to Justice Carrocia for our careful consideration of all the evidence that was presented to this trial. She's reached a just and correct verdict that must be respected. Nobody disputes that sexual assault is a terrible societal plague, and Alex sincerely hopes that this prosecution doesn't stop the quest to combat sexual violence and to bring genuine offenders to justice. However, an accusation is just that, an accusation. This case stands to the fact that we must never lose sight of the fundamental right to be presumed innocent. Now, more than ever before, a fair response to sexual assault claims requires a balanced perspective and public trust and the decision making of the courts. Anything less, only harms the justice system and the cause of eliminating sexual violence. Thank you. Julie Santarossa, lawyer for Dillon Dubé For Mr. Dubé, this has been a long and difficult process. He is relieved by the outcome, and he is grateful that Justice Carrocia decided what she did and did so fairly and efficiently. Throughout this trial, Mr. Dube was impressed by the fairness and impartiality demonstrated by her honor. This decision comes as a result of careful deliberation by her honor. She engaged with the evidence in a thoughtful, methodical, and principled manner. Her reasons reflect not only a command of the legal principles at stake, but also a deep sense of responsibility in assessing the evidence, applying the law, and demonstrating a strong commitment to justice. Mr. Dubé has always maintained his innocence. He is thankful for all of the unwavering support from his friends and family who have also believed in him. For all of you that have been by his side throughout this period of time, you know who you are, we thank you. Mr. Dubé is hopeful that everyone can move forward from this in a positive manner. He is requesting privacy during this period of time. In view of the court's decision, Mr. Dubé will not be making any further statements at this time. Thank you. Read the full statement from the complainant's lawyer Gasps in court as all five players acquitted in Hockey Canada sexual assault trial Hockey Canada sex assault complainant 'very disappointed' with judge's assessment of her honesty, lawyer says Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here.
Yahoo
16 hours ago
- Yahoo
Former Alberta UCP candidate found in contempt over election financing investigation
EDMONTON — An Alberta judge has found a former United Conservative candidate and five party donors to be in contempt for not attending interviews as part of an investigation into alleged irregular political donations made in 2023. A decision issued this week by Justice Peter Michalyshyn says for the past year the provincial elections commissioner has been investigating donations made to the party by people allegedly using money that wasn't their own leading up to the 2023 provincial election. The decision says the commissioner's investigation began in the spring of last year but it's not clear if the candidate, Ali Haymour, and the five party donors are the targets of the investigation. It says the commissioner sought to interview Haymour and the other donors as it was believed they hold relevant information and evidence. According to the decision Haymour and the other donors argued they didn't need to participate in the commissioner's investigation due to recent changes to provincial election financing rules the Alberta government made this past spring. Michalyshyn's decision says the changes might affect potential outcomes of the investigation, but it doesn't reduce the commissioner's power to compel people for interviews and the candidate and donors had no legal reason not to participate. Among other things, the legislated changes prevent the elections commissioner from imposing penalties and sanctions on those who break election financing rules if one year has passed since the commissioner received the complaint. This report by The Canadian Press was first published July 24, 2025. Jack Farrell and Lisa Johnson, The Canadian Press Sign in to access your portfolio
