Fereidon Hayatibahar is guilty of a total of eight counts: one count of criminal negligence causing death and three counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm, one count of impaired driving causing death and three counts of impaired driving causing bodily harm.

The judge concludes that the Crown has proven beyond a reasonable doubt that the man of Iranian origin was also the one driving the vehicle and that he was drunk that evening.

Fereidon Hayatibahar’s defense suggested the Crown had charged the wrong person of the two men who were in the same car on the night of the fatal collision.

Recall of facts

Mr Hayatibahar, who had just arrived from Iran, was 19 when the three-car collision occurred shortly before 9:30 p.m. on August 18, 2019. He did not have a driver’s license in the country.

His friend, Farbod Riazi, accompanied him in the car. The two men were arrested three days after the accident. Mr. Riazi had however been released without being charged with anything.

Mr. Hayatibahar and Mr. Riazi, who had known each other since childhood, met in Canada. They had spent the afternoon in an amusement park, where they had consumed alcohol.

Mr. Riazi had agreed to leave the wheel to his friend to make him enjoy driving his mother’s Mercedes on a section of the highway.

According to the joint statement of facts, the driver of the Mercedes was traveling excessively fast southbound on Yonge Street between 100 and 180 km/h, in a 60 km/h zone.

The victims’ Hyundai and Mazda were traveling northbound near Townwood Drive in Richmond Hill.

The driver of the Mercedes then lost control of the vehicle and suddenly crossed the center line, colliding with the other two cars. The Mercedes ended its race, after several rolls, on the side of the driver’s side.

MM. Hayatibahar and Riazi were also lightly injured in the crash and taken to Mackenzie Hospital in Richmond Hill.

The trial, held in Newmarket in February 2022, was to determine, among other things, who was driving the Mercedes at the time of the accident.

The defense argued that Mr. Riazi is obviously a liar and an unreliable witness who had every reason to blame the accident on his client.

Judge’s verdict

In his decision, Justice Joseph Di Luca of the Ontario Superior Court wrote that the central witness for the Crown is Farbod Riazi, who placed Mr Hayatibahar directly at the wheel of the Mercedes during the accident [ainsi qu]a number of eyewitnesses, who were present at the scene.

Mr. Hayatibahar did not testify at his trial and his defense argued that he was not driving at the time of the collision.

Accordingly, the magistrate acknowledges that he had to rely on the credibility of the witnesses in this case and on the accuracy of their testimonies at the bar of the trial.

To be clear, this case is not simply a credibility contest between Mr. Riazi and the probative testimony that favors Mr. Hayatibahar; my task is not to decide which proof I preferwrites the judge.

The magistrate further asserted that Mr. Riazi’s testimony lacked credibility.

He nevertheless recalls in the light of several testimonies that Mr. Hayatibahar did indeed extricate himself from the vehicle first through the rear door behind him before Mr. Riazi, because his friend was still strapped in his passenger seat in the front.

The magistrate notably determined that Mr. Riazi was Mr. Hayatibahar’s passenger at the time of the accident thanks to the injuries that his right shoulder suffered from the seat belt. This proves, according to him, that Mr. Riazi has buckled his belt from right to left.

However, if Mr. Riazi was driving the Mercedes, he would have buckled his seat belt from left to right and he would have been injured in the left shoulder under the force of the impact.

The judge also relied on the infotainment of the Mercedes which shows that the vehicle stopped on the way after the stop in a McDonald’s and that two doors were opened. This means, according to him, that the two men changed places some time later.

The magistrate finally retained the fact that the keys of the Mercedes had been found in the pocket of Mr. Hayatibahar’s pants at the hospital.

The Crown had retained the testimony of Darya Barghian, a friend of Mr. Riazi, who had heard the accused say on the telephone in Farsi, We are screwed up.

A statement that the Crown qualified as an admission of guilt on the part of the accused. However, the judge did not pay much attention to it.

The Crown had also cited exculpatory remarks by Mr. Hayatibahar who had told two people on the roadway just after the accident that he was the passenger in the Mercedes, when it was not true.

The judge points out that Mr. Hayatibahar wanted to distract from the fact that he was not licensed to drive in Ontario and that he wanted to blame it on his friend.

He only sought to defend his own selfish interestshe continues in his judgment, of which Radio-Canada obtained a copy.

He also concludes that the blood taken at the hospital was indeed that of Mr. Hayatibahar and that the forensic tests prove that he had a level of 170 mg of alcohol/100 ml of blood at the time of the death. accident.

He also recalls that a policeman had realized that the two men were drunk, because they smelled of alcohol when help arrived on the scene.

The sentencing hearing will take place on a date yet to be determined by the parties.