Child pornography trial continues

Officer testifies about recovery of deleted photos from Waylon James Molyneaux’s phone

How the police got photos off a Summerside man’s phone was the focus of part of a child pornography case in provincial court Tuesday.

Waylon James Molyneaux, 32, appeared before Judge John Douglas in provincial court in Charlottetown for a trial on charges of possessing child pornography and making child pornography.

Tuesday’s proceeding continued for the second day of a voir dire, which is used to determine if evidence will be admissible in the trial.

The court heard testimony from a Charlottetown police officer who investigated after someone said they found pornographic photos of an underage girl on Molyneaux’s phone.

That person said they instinctively deleted the photos.

The officer testified police used specialized software that was able to retrieve 20 photos from the phone that were related to the case.

During his testimony, the officer said there was no coercion, any promises or threats used to get Molyneaux to sign the form.

“I never did any of that, your honour,” the officer said.

The officer said he mentioned to Molyneaux that if he didn’t sign the consent form the police would get a warrant. Molyneaux told the officer he didn’t want to hinder the process.

A Charlottetown police analyst later used software to extract data from the phone, which he provided to the investigating officer.

The officer testified Molyneaux mentioned that he wanted to prove his innocence, which was why he allowed the search of his phone.

During the cross examination, defence lawyer Peter Ghiz questioned the officer about where the photos came from during the extraction, suggesting they came from Molyneaux’s Google Drive. A Google Drive is a place where people can store files online without taking up space on their device.

Files can still be accessed by signing into a Google account through a phone.

The officer testified that the analyst wouldn’t have pulled any data from Molyneaux’s Google Drive.

Ghiz also questioned the officer about other parts of the interview, saying his client didn’t read the consent form before signing it.

The officer read part of the form to Molyneaux to explain that he didn’t have to let the police search his phone and that he could stop them at any time. Ghiz said there was more on the form than what the officer read to Molyneaux.

The officer agreed he didn’t read it all out loud before Molyneaux signed it. A publication ban prevents the release of any details that could identify the victim.