Public safety is at serious risk: the sharp rise in criminal cases being dismissed before trial in Ontario raises critical concerns about justice and safety. But here’s where it gets controversial—many cases are being withdrawn at a rate that could let potentially guilty individuals go unpunished, sparking debates about whether our justice system is adequately equipped to protect citizens.
Recent official statistics from Ontario’s courts reveal a troubling trend: charges of serious crimes—such as homicides and assaults—have increased significantly over the past decade. In 2015, there were approximately 57,000 charges in this category, and by 2025, that number has grown to around 80,000. At the same time, the number of these cases dropped or withdrawn before reaching a verdict has more than doubled—from about 19,000 cases in 2015 to roughly 39,000 in 2025.
This means that in 2015, about one-third of such charges (roughly 33%) were dismissed or withdrawn before trial. Fast forward to 2025, and nearly half—or 48%—of these cases are being dropped, suggesting a growing disconnect between law enforcement efforts and the capacity of the justice system to prosecute these cases fully.
Lesley Pasquino from the Ontario Crown Attorney’s Association remarks that the increasing pressure on prosecutors—often overwhelmed by the volume of cases—combined with the complexity of modern evidence, is a key factor. Today’s cases frequently involve vast amounts of electronic evidence: emails, text messages, surveillance videos, and body camera footage, which weren’t as prevalent or complicated to handle in the past. This surge of digital evidence makes building and processing cases more challenging, thus contributing to the rise in dismissals.
The implications are profound for public safety. As Pasquino emphasizes, decision-makers—those controlling budgets and resources—must recognize the importance of investing sufficiently in the justice system so it can serve the people of Ontario effectively. Without proper funding, she warns, the system risks becoming unable to deliver justice, potentially allowing dangerous individuals to evade accountability.
Adding to the controversy, critics like NDP Justice Critic Kristyn Wong-Tam argue that chronic underfunding hampers the courts’ ability to function properly. She highlights a disturbing possibility: when cases are dropped, individuals charged with serious crimes might walk free, undermining the safety of communities and the belief in justice. Wong-Tam stresses that meaningful action and increased resources are essential to prevent this crisis from worsening.
One particularly heartbreaking example involves a case in Toronto involving a teen accused of harming a raccoon and killing a beloved neighborhood cat named Mildred. Despite initial charges, the Crown withdrew charges related to harming the raccoon, and ultimately, a judge dismissed remaining charges after criticizing Toronto Police for losing critical evidence like photos and witness statements. These photos and videos, provided by neighbors, documented Mildred’s suffering after being found shaved and mutilated, yet the case fell apart due to mishandling of evidence.
Mildred’s owner, Sara Downing, expressed her shock and frustration: “It’s astounding that no one faces responsibility for Mildred’s treatment. Knowing there’s no justice—that’s heartbreaking.” Community members, deeply affected by the case, echoed these sentiments, describing the pain and grief caused by the lack of resolution.
In response, the Toronto Police have initiated a review into the officers’ actions to determine if disciplinary measures are warranted, and they've introduced new procedures aimed at improving evidence management and speeding up disclosures.
The Ontario government recognizes these issues, with the Attorney General’s office emphasizing the importance of preventing cases from being dismissed due to delays. They plan to invest over half a billion dollars by 2028 in modernizing court infrastructure—adding judges and prosecutors, and implementing new technology—to handle an increasing and more complex caseload.
A notable policy introduced this year, called “stacking,” involves scheduling multiple cases for the same day, which often results in some being withdrawn or delayed due to resource constraints. While sometimes withdrawals occur after careful review of evidence suggesting a trial wouldn’t result in conviction, critics argue that this practice can undermine trust in the system.
As community members consider pursuing formal complaints against officers involved in the Mildred case, questions remain: What does this say about our justice system’s priorities? And more broadly, are we doing enough to ensure that justice isn’t just a word but a reality for all citizens? The debate continues—with many asking whether increased funding and reform can truly turn the tide in Ontario’s courts. What’s your take? Do you believe these changes are enough, or is it time for a fundamental overhaul to safeguard public safety?
