Published Oct 02, 2025Last updated 4 hours ago8 minute readScales of justice. 123RF STOCKArticle contentA man who was accused of forcing a woman to switch seats at gunpoint so he didn’t get caught driving impaired at a police checkpoint has been acquitted by a Cape Breton judge.THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY.Subscribe now to access this story and more:Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsSUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES.Subscribe or sign in to your account to continue your reading experience.Unlimited access to the website and appExclusive access to premium content, newsletters and podcastsFull access to the e-Edition app, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment onEnjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalistsSupport local journalists and the next generation of journalistsRegister to unlock more articles.Create an account or sign in to continue your reading experience.Access additional stories every monthShare your thoughts and join the conversation in our commenting communityGet email updates from your favourite authorsSign In or Create an AccountorArticle contentStephen Derez Brown-Beals was charged with multiple weapons, driving and violence-related offences stemming from an Aug. 2, 2024, incident in St. Peter’s, Richmond County.Article contentArticle contentBrown-Beals pleaded guilty to flight from police, dangerous driving and obstruction. He pleaded not guilty to seven other charges, including impaired driving, unlawful confinement, assault with a weapon and pointing a firearm, and elected trial in provincial court.Article contentArticle contentAfter the first trial resulted in a mistrial, the Crown proceeded with a new trial in Port Hawkesbury provincial court before Judge Del Atwood.Article contentFIRST DATEArticle contentDuring the second trial, the alleged victim, who was 21 years old and living in Eastern Passage, testified she had met Brown-Beals through Facetime a month or two earlier.Article contentShe said the day of the alleged offences was the first time they had met face in person calling it the “worst day of her life.”Article contentAccording to the woman, she and Brown-Beals started the date off at his parents’ house in Mulgrave Park, Halifax Regional Municipality, where they spent a few hours drinking vodka and beer.Article contentShe said Brown-Beals suggested a road trip to Sydney and they left at 8:30-9 p.m. with Brown-Beals driving while she sat in the passenger seat.Article contentShe said they had a quarter of a 40-oz bottle of vodka and cans of beer.Article contentArticle contentHANDGUN CLAIMSArticle contentShe said as they approached St. Peter’s, they noticed a police checkpoint and Brown-Beals pulled over in a nearby parking lot where he told her to switch seats with him. She said he then pulled a handgun out of the glovebox, pointed it in her face and told her he would kill her if she didn’t get out.Article contentThe woman said she and Brown-Beals got out of the vehicle and switched seats. She said she then turned the car away from the roadblock and headed toward the Canso Causeway when they were pulled over by police.Article contentShe also said she had seen a shotgun in the vehicle.Article contentDuring cross-examination, the woman testified that she could have lost her job because of an impaired-driving charge and that she knew that Brown-Beals was on house-arrest conditions.Article contentShe acknowledged that she didn’t tell the arresting officer that Brown-Beals had a gun when she was being arrested for impaired driving.Article contentShe testified that once she was back at the detachment, she knew was not going to pass the breath test. After she failed the first test, she told the officer that Brown-Beals had pointed a handgun at her.Article contentWhen she was told Brown-Beals had been arrested and was giving police a different version of events, the woman agreed that hearing this “pissed her off.” She then stated that her plan was to get stopped at the roadblock so she could “get the f— out of there.”Article content‘STOP, POLICE!’Article contentThe prosecution also called the two RCMP officers who were manning the checkpoint as witnesses.Article contentConst. Donald Shaw testified that at around 11:30 p.m., he saw a Lincoln-model vehicle stop short of the checkpoint and pull into a parking lot next to the RCMP detachment. Concerned that the people in the vehicle might be switching seats or dumping contraband, he watched the vehicle pull back on the highway before quickly turning around and driving away from the checkpoint.Article contentArticle contentCCTV video recorded at front of the St. Peter’s RCMP detachment showed the Lincoln pulling into the parking lot and the passenger and driver exiting to switch seats.Article contentShaw said he and Const. Brett MacDonald each got into their police cruisers and gave chase.Article contentThe officers quickly closed the distance and pulled the vehicle over in front of a motel just past the St Peter’s Canal.Article contentShaw approached the driver’s side while MacDonald went to the passenger side.Article contentHe said the woman displayed signs of impairment, “slurring her words” and appearing “very, very shaky” when he asked for documents.Article contentShaw said Brown-Beals, who was sitting in the passenger seat with his feet on the dash, also had slurred speech and told him had consumed several beers that day.Article contentShaw said the woman was unsteady when she exited the vehicle and he described her as argumentative. He said she blew a “fail” when he used an approved screening device to her breath for alcohol. He then arrested the woman for impaired driving.Article contentArticle contentHe allowed her to return to the Lincoln to get her purse and said he did not hear her say anything to Brown-Beals.Article contentShaw acknowledged that as he interviewed the woman she did not present as fearful, alarmed or traumatized to any degree.Article contentShaw said he was seating the woman in the back of his cruiser when he heard MacDonald yelling, “Stop, police!” and saw the vehicle speeding away.Article contentAs MacDonald gave pursuit in his cruiser, Shaw contacted his dispatch centre to advise the Port Hawkesbury detachment.Article contentMacDonald attempted to pursue Brown-Beals but called it off and radioed an update to the dispatch centre.Article contentHe testified that he did not see any firearms inside the Lincoln while trying to maintain a close visual of the inside of the vehicle from the passenger side when it was pulled over.Article contentOn cross-examination, Shaw said the woman did not appear fearful, alarmed or traumatized when he dealt with her at the roadside and interviewed her.Article contentHe also did not see any weapons or firearms inside the Lincoln.Article contentShaw also testified that the woman had not mentioned in her statement to him that she had seen a shotgun in the back seat of the Lincoln.Article contentCREDIBILITY QUESTIONEDArticle contentIn rendering his decision, Atwood determined that the charges against Brown-Beals “hinge on the credibility and reliability” of the woman, who was the only witness to testify about what happened inside the Lincoln as they approached the checkpoint.Article contentAtwood said he “harbours a substantial and reasonable doubt” concerning the woman’s testimony, noting that she was never prosecuted on the impaired driving charge.Article content“First of all, there is at least the appearance that her co-operation with the state involved some form of immunity-from-prosecution arrangement,” he wrote, noting that the evidence placed before the court established she operated a vehicle with a prohibited blood-alcohol concentration in her body.Article contentArticle content“She was certainly chargeable — but was not charged.Article content“This would appear to suggest circumstantially that there was some form of immunity-from-prosecution arrangement with (the woman) in place. It does not necessarily follow that immunity was exchanged for testimony; it might have been simply a charitable decision based on the belief that (the woman) had been a victim of violence, and coerced by Mr. Brown-Beals into driving. However, it is, in my view, a matter that might usefully have been clarified by the prosecution at the outset of the trial.Article content“That this matter was not clarified is not the fault of (the woman). However, the evidence that she was never charged criminally adds complexity to the assessment of her credibility.”Article contentPROLONGED DETENTIONArticle contentAtwood also questioned the prolonged investigative detention of the woman, saying Shaw’s treatment of her “strongly incentivized her giving an inculpatory statement against Mr. Brown-Beals.”Article contentArticle contentHe said Shaw arrested her after she failed a roadside screening then took her to the St. Peter’s detachment and obtained two breath samples.Article content“Cst. Shaw could have released her then on process: he had nailed down her identity, he had collected all the evidence about her charge that he needed, and there was no risk of her continuing to commit an offence. All the preconditions for a release from custody following an arrest without warrant were in place,” Atwood wrote.Article content“Instead, Cst. Shaw took (the woman) to the Port Hawkesbury detachment and lodged her in cells.”Article contentAtwood said the woman remained in Port Hawkesbury cells until Shaw returned the next morning and was returned to cells by Shaw at least twice when she didn’t provide the information he wanted.Article content“When statements are obtained by police from witnesses in circumstances such as this, concerns about credibility and reliability will arise. Is the witness providing a truthful account—or, is the witness simply delivering a get-out-of-jail fiction that will please the interrogator?” he wrote.Article contentAtwood said other credibility questions arise from the woman’s conduct when she and Brown-Beals were first stopped, including that she denied drinking.Article contentHe also said that after being removed from behind the wheel and taken back to Shaw’s cruiser, she asked to go back to the Lincoln to get her purse, which contradicts her testimony that she wanted to get caught at the checkpoint so that she could “get the f— out of there.”Article contentUNUSUAL REACTIONArticle contentIn addition, Atwood wrote that Shaw described her as argumentative and testified she did not present to him as fearful.Article content“This sort of behaviour does not project the level of mortal fright one would reasonably expect to be exhibited by a person who has just escaped from a high-risk-of-lethality experience. The prosecutor makes the point that there is no one way for victims of violence to react. That might be so. However, judges are permitted to rely on logic, reason and common sense in assessing witness credibility,” he said.Article contentArticle content“While different people might react differently to traumatic situations, this surely cannot prohibit a court from drawing reasonable credibility inferences from the proven way a person did react. When (she) was dealing with Cst. Shaw roadside, she did not appear concerned—rather, she was confrontational. That is not the reaction of someone who had just been terrorized with a handgun.”Article contentWhile the prosecution suggested Brown-Beals fled from police because he had weapons, Atwood said his actions could also be explained by the fact he was subject to house arrest under the terms of a conditional-sentence order.Article content“In this case, Mr Brown-Beals’s sudden departure was as consistent with not wanting to get caught being AWOL while on house arrest, as it was with escaping with firearms after having menaced (the woman).”Article contentAtwood concluded that it is clear Brown-Beals sped off in a manner that was dangerous to the public and evaded police pursuit, there’s no evidence he had firearms inside the vehicle, threatened the woman with them, kept her confined, or that his ability to drive was impaired to any degree by alcohol.Article contentHe recorded acquittals on those seven charges.Article contentA sentencing hearing will now be scheduled for the three charges to which Brown-Beals has pleaded guilty.Article contentArticle content
Cape Breton judge acquits man of forcing woman to flee police roadblock at gunpoint
