Defence counsel for Michael Haaima spent two days at the end of July scrutinizing how one complainant’s account of their relationship changed over time, including confronting the woman with an allegation she did not simply omit from her first police interview, but appeared to deny when specifically asked about it.
Natasha Calvinho’s cross-examination on Thursday, Jul. 30 and Friday, Jul. 31, 2026, focused heavily on statements the complainant gave to police in April 2022 and November 2023, comparing them with allegations she made considerably later and with her testimony at Haaima’s trial in June.
One of the most pointed exchanges concerned the complainant’s allegation that Haaima showed her child pornography.
During her examination-in-chief in June, the woman testified that Haaima unexpectedly showed her child pornography during what had otherwise been consensual sexual activity. She acknowledged that she did not disclose the incident until years later, explaining that she had struggled with what she had seen and was not initially prepared to talk about it.
Under cross-examination, however, Calvinho took the complainant back to her first police interview, conducted immediately following Haaima’s arrest in April 2022.
During that interview, Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) Detective Tracy Tucker specifically asked the complainant whether Haaima had ever shown her pornography involving anyone under the age of 18.
“Not that I saw,” the complainant answered at the time.
Calvinho suggested that answer could not be reconciled with the complainant’s later testimony, saying, “So that would be, according to your evidence from the last occasion — then that would be a lie.”
The complainant rejected the suggestion that the circumstances could be viewed so simply. She described the day she gave that statement as one where her “world was destroyed,” telling the court she was overwrought and being interviewed by police.
“At that time, I was scared, intimidated, and that’s what I said at the time,” she stated.
Calvinho pointed out that the complainant did not report allegedly seeing child pornography until years later.
The woman acknowledged that was when she first disclosed it, but maintained she had struggled throughout that period with what she says Haaima had shown her.
“That’s when I first brought it up, yes,” she said, “because that is the first time that I felt I could talk about it.”
The exchange formed part of a much broader defence examination of when the complainant’s allegations emerged and how her perception of Haaima and their relationship changed following his arrest.
Calvinho repeatedly emphasized that investigators made clear from the beginning that they were conducting a serious and ongoing investigation and wanted information about Haaima.
The complainant’s April 2022 statement was lengthy and detailed. She discussed aspects of the relationship she found troubling, including arguments and her suspicions that Haaima had lied to her about parts of his life.
She described Haaima during that first interview as a “normal person,” as well as sensitive and kind, and said he appeared to have improved his emotional availability since they had first met.
“That’s what I saw at the time, and how I felt at the time,” she told Calvinho when confronted with those descriptions.
The complainant testified that her understanding changed as time passed and she learned more.
“I was in denial, and that was my headspace at the time,” she said.
Calvinho told her the defence intended to examine that exact evolution: “We’re going to look at that shift, and when that shift occurs.”
That shift became particularly important as Calvinho moved to the complainant’s second major police interview, conducted by Kingston Police Detective Jesse Braun on November 30, 2023, approximately 20 months after Haaima’s arrest. By then, the investigation had expanded considerably.
During the 2023 interview, the complainant disclosed incidents she had not described in her original statement, including an allegation that one time Haaima unexpectedly slapped her and spat in her face during sexual activity.
When she testified about the incident in June 2026, the woman described the spitting as “really degrading.”
During cross-examination, Calvinho focused on the fact that the allegation had not appeared in the complainant’s initial statement, as well as on the circumstances surrounding its later disclosure.
The 2023 interview also included discussion between Braun and the complainant about whether conduct she was describing could constitute a criminal offence. Braun explained that being slapped, hit, or choked during sexual activity without consent could constitute an assault and told the complainant that, based on some of the conduct she was describing, police believed she had been victimized by the accused.
The complainant maintained at trial that some of Haaima’s alleged abuses happened without warning or discussion and that she had not consented to them.
The defence questioning did not focus solely on allegations that appeared later; Calvinho also compared the complainant’s earlier descriptions of Haaima’s behaviour with how she characterizes the same behaviour today.
In her 2023 police interview, the complainant described periods when Haaima was attentive and supportive, including driving her to and from work, making lunches, and otherwise taking care of her.
At trial, she acknowledged making those statements but said she now views some of that behaviour differently.
“He was doing everything he thought I needed to make me dependent on him,” she testified. “That’s the whole cycle of domestic violence.”
The woman similarly described Haaima in her earlier statements as emotionally manipulative and whiny rather than particularly angry. When Braun asked in 2023 about Haaima’s temper, she said he “never really had much of a temper,” instead describing arguments in which he became emotional or portrayed himself as the victim.
At trial, she described behaviour she characterized as manipulative: “He would throw tantrums and play the victim,” she testified.
The distinction became a recurring theme of the cross-examination: in some instances, the complainant did not dispute what she had previously told police but said she now interprets those events differently. In others, Calvinho focused on allegations that were not included in the earlier statements at all.
The child pornography allegation presented a further issue because the complainant had been specifically asked about such material during her first police interview and responded that she had not seen it.
The complainant maintained that the differences must be understood in the context of her state of mind immediately following Haaima’s arrest and the time it took her to process what she says occurred.
Calvinho, meanwhile, continued to press the complainant about when allegations arose, what she knew when she spoke with investigators, and whether police discussions about Haaima and the criminal significance of certain behaviour influenced her later understanding of the relationship.
The cross-examination was not completed before the trial adjourned for its scheduled August recess.
The judge-alone trial, which began in May 2025, sees Haaima charged with 98 offences, including sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, forcible confinement, trafficking in persons, and child pornography offences. He has pleaded not guilty to all but two of the charges.
The complainant’s cross-examination is expected to continue when the trial resumes in September.
By Michelle Dorey Forestell, Local Journalism Initiative Reporter
Original Published on Aug 10, 2026 at 15:05
Recent Comments