Luke Halstead – Part-time Paramedic, Full-Time Predator

Luke Halstead – Part-time Paramedic, Full-Time Predator

THE DIRTY ARMY: Luke Halstead is a part-time paramedic in Toronto, Canada. He was kicked out of the army when he committed drug and assault crimes. Now, he perpetrates his crimes on women. According to court records, in 2017, a woman (the mother of his son) testified that he was physically, emotionally and mentally abusive towards her and pushed her down the stairs. She also stated him to have the similar traits to a sociopath. It didn’t end there. In 2017, another girl who didn’t know the other, reported him to police for sexual assault and sexual assault causing bodily harm, where she too, stated him to have the similar traits to a sociopath. The girl had evidence from a rape kit. 2 girls who don’t know each other say the same thing? Yup. Just like his women, he forces his son to do things he doesn’t want to do and now suffers low self esteem, depression and anxiety all caused by his drug addicted father. Child protective services have intervened due tot he child’s mental abuse caused by his father. Created a bomb in 2016 and received a warning from the OPP and a warning on his firearms licence. Facing 2 law suits in the Superior Court of Ontario totaling almost $1,000,000, while the mother of his son fights desperately to keep his son away from the sociopath. This deadbeat dad lies through his teeth and lures abandoned and naive girls into his polyamorous disease cult-like fairy tale of having 2 wives one day, all by promising exclusivity. When will he be behind bars? He’s a public safety risk to women’s emotional, physical and mental health. Part-time Paramedic, full-time predator… The best part about all of this is that he still suffers delusions that he’s a good guy. Sends naked photos of his victims around as well, where he refers to the as his “good little girls”.

https://thedirty.com/?p=2262208

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

  1. responseJune 7, 2019 at 10:26 AM

    Don’t worry anonymous poster. It says convicted 1999, because that was when he was tried and convicted for his aggravated assault. He would have been charged in 1997, because it takes about 2 years to get to trial/sentencing, so thats why the judge says he was a 17 year old offender, even though he was 19 in 1999.

  2. Anonymous helperApril 19, 2019 at 3:17 PM

    He also tends to use women for money. He has his own money but hides it and mooches off women. Make sure he pays your trips, ubers, dinners and all dates for all the women he manipulated into paying his way before. Make it hard for him.

  3. Someone he datedApril 14, 2019 at 1:06 PM

    I met Luke several months ago and we dated for about 3 months. I invited him to vancouver for a vacation at my family vacation house and had to ask him to leave immediately and pay for his own flight back. I kicked him out with all his stuff and never looked back. I do not want to share what happened but I just want to say that he is NOTHING like who he claims to be. I still feel sickened that I let that man in my body and paid his way. To other women out there, I’m deeply sorry for what your enduring and I wish you all the best in your quest for justice.

  4. Anonymous helperApril 14, 2019 at 12:49 PM

    Yeah and he had a girl falsely charged for signing a character reference letter. She posted forensics on her website that said he signed it not her. He probably did this to get out of punishment for the sexual assault. He had friends at 41st division. I hope she win her civil law suit against him poor girl. If he was previously convicted of aggravated assault for beating a man near to death to steal money for drugs then he should not be a paramedic even if he got a pardon. And with his firearms guilty pleas, spreading infections and forcing his son into firearms activities he obviously cant be a public safety worker when he doesnt respect safety of people. Can’t believe hes still hunting women on tinder. What a predator going nowhere fast… He should focus on getting help for his mental health issues

  5. A quick Google after a tinder conversationMarch 14, 2019 at 10:39 PM

    I did a quick Google of ‘Luke paramedic Toronto’ after a nice conversation I had on Tinder with this guy. Glad I did, though he’s done nothing to me I rather know who I’m talking to always.

    Would like to upload new photos to this site but it doesn’t appear that you can.

    • Helping women see their worthApril 14, 2019 at 12:43 PM

      Totally written by Luke but if it isn’t, be careful. He is nothing who you think he is. He just wants to get into your pants and will be in tinder for the rest of his life filling his sex addiction. He has caused so much pain and trauma for traditional women he has met. Use protection always as he has unprotected sex with other partners and go to police immediately if he assaults you or uses any physical violence on you. Also dont let him claim he has no money. Its his way of mooching off women. He’s not a real man. Good luck, but honestly, he is a sociopath and you won’t be able to tell from one conversation if he is telling the truth. Multiple women alleging abuse and multiple legal issues… And convictions. He is a pathological liar. Don’t be another naive woman he can make fun of with his friends. If you believe you can tell after a conversation, then you are naive but hope he doesnt destroy you. These postings are just out there to warn women. Its up to the women to protect herself. P.S You are probably a beautiful girl without a good upbringing and should not be on tinder allowing men who will never love or respect you, use your body.

      • MaddyMay 18, 2019 at 11:38 AM

        True he is a sociopath. He will get a way with a lot because socipaths always appear super credible. It will take a good lawyer to get him. He preys on women with low self esteem and makes fun of them later that they have acne or are part black.

  6. brittFebruary 14, 2019 at 6:21 AM

    And guess what? something wasn’t lining up… he claimed his wife sent Jade an email because she was hurt that he was in a new relationship and possibly in love but the wife said in her email that she wanted to warn Jade that he was being dishonest, then low and behold, news surfaces that he was actually living with a girl named Olli Royales, who lived free in his and his wife’s basement for sex favours. He was manipulative and controlling to this poor native girl and told her she was his life partner. Why would the wife be mad that he moved on when they already had his life partner living in their basement, who claimed Luke loved her? His stories never lined up. It seems Jade was telling the truth. Sarah emailed her to warn her only, that he already had a life partner. Sarah was not jealous or upset by anything Jade did. And what an a55hole… he met Jade and never disclosed he had a life partner sex slave living in his basement.

  7. HeatherFebruary 13, 2019 at 11:46 AM

    Anyone who has any information about him should contact the police or Jade Naraine to help her get justice. Apparently her default judgment was set aside and Luke and Jade will be going to trial for her sex assault civil case. I recently reached out to Jade to tell her that Luke Halstead had a woman living in his basement for free to perform sexual favours for him and his wife Sarah Halstead/ Sarah McPherson/ Sarah MacPherson. The woman was Olli Royales but he kicked her out when she got pregnant with another man’s child.

  8. Anonymous helperFebruary 10, 2019 at 8:14 AM

    Luke Halstead raped a girl Jade Naraine and has tried to have her falsely charged on an ongoing basis for sending legal letters and just a few text messages asking him and some men to leave her alone. Luke sexually assaulted Jade and had a violent past as a criminal where he did 15 months imprisonment for aggravated assault.

    We are tired of hearing about how Luke Halstead got that poor girl charged so much for ridiculous stuff like sending legal letters out according to her website. He didn’t just almost kill a man, or commit fire arms charges but the conduct has continued with exposing his son to bombs, and abusing various women behind closed doors. Michelle Roth testifies to having been thrown down the stairs and Jade Naraine testifies to sexual assault. We are coming forward because we want the women to start getting justice and make sure Luke can’t fool police or judges any longer.

    It’s time that anyone who has information about this man comes out and forward to strengthen the cases for the women who have matters before the court.

  9. Anonymous helperJanuary 25, 2019 at 2:08 PM

    From an anonymous source. We are pointing you here to publicly available information, with references on CanLii. We want to be of assistance but will remain anonymous.

    Citation: Roth v. Halstead, 2017 ONCJ 593 – 2017-07-31
    From the Judgment of Justice O’Connell:

    [24] In July of 2010, the father brought an ex parte motion for custody of Thomas. According to the father, the mother had quit her job without a contingency plan and could no longer afford her rent and was facing homelessness. Mr. Halstead deposed that the mother was behaving in an increasingly erratic manner and that she was financially and emotionally unstable so he offered to take Thomas for a period of time.

    [25] Mr. Halstead obtained a temporary without prejudice custody order of Thomas and brought him to his home in Pembroke. Mr. Halstead then abandoned his application in August of 2010 when Ms Roth agreed to move to his mother’s basement apartment, where she had lived previously and been assisted by the paternal grandmother. Mr. Halstead returned Thomas to Ms Roth’s primary care shortly after that.

    This is also when Luke’s Court Martial took place according to the public records. The actual date when the ‘offense’ for this court martial took place is unknown, but it can be assumed, based on the seriousness of the charge, it was shortly before the trial:

    It’s assumed that Luke failed to inform the judges, that he was scheduled to attend a court martial only 5 days later to face charges “for having in your possession without lawful excuse a number of blank and live ammunition and different grenades, simulators, basically, pyrotechnic devices.” He was found guilty.

    Citation: R. v. Halstead, 2010 CM 3018 – 2010-09-01
    The Judge noted:
    • “But the quantity is a very serious aggravating factor. You kept a lot, which is very unusual; it’s more than keeping a souvenir in your house.”
    • “The other thing is the type of ammunition; hand grenades, simulators, or trip flares contain substances which are very dangerous, especially—and it brings me to the second aggravating factor I consider—is the place for storing all those things.”
    • “You bring this at your home. You know in the Canadian Forces we keep that in a special place in order to avoid—for security reasons and because we don’t want to have all people accessing this and playing with that. You brought this at your house. So I understand that from your perspective you probably had access to this, but it also means that others may have access to this, and other people that may come in your house, not having a clue how to handle this, and expose themselves to any kind of injury or any other thing.”
    • “…but you didn’t have on your mind how dangerous it could have been if somebody, not knowing how to use this, would have played with that.”
    • “It’s difficult to the court to reconcile the fact that you’re wearing this appointment and that you kept all those things at your home. You should have, at some point, decided to bring back all those things knowing how dangerous it could have been for yourself and anybody else.”

    Citation: R. v. Halstead, [1999] O.J. No. 5418 (SCJ) [MISSING!].
    Referenced in: R. v. Pangan, 2014 ONCJ 327 (CanLII) and R. v. Braithwaite, 2010 MBPC 53 (CanLII)

    From R. v. Braithwaite, 2010:

    [17… In R. v. Halstead, [1999] O.J. No. 5418, a decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, an offender, with four others, participated in the savage beating of a victim. The victim was chosen at random and attacked for money and to steal his stereo. The group beat him into unconsciousness, broke some of his teeth and permanently mangled one ear. The offender was 19 at the time and lived on the street where he abused alcohol and drugs. He had no prior record and was on bail for nine moths with no problems. He had addressed his substance abuse and was back in school. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and probation. An important factor was that by the time of sentencing, he did not seem to be a continuing risk to the community. …

    Luke was 17 at the time just turning 18; however, sometimes they get the ages wrong. Information is not always accurate. Luke has allegedly had a criminal record that he had expunged. This was from a period when Luke was an adult. We don’t know the exact date of the 1999 incident or when it was expunged. Since it was expunged, the records cannot be searched.

    Everything else lines up, substance abuse, homelessness etc

    Also, from the Court Martial:

    [12] c. The fact that you did not have an entry on your conduct sheet related to similar offences. Despite the fact that you have a conduct sheet, the entry on it has no relation, as mentioned by your counsel, to the facts or to the kind of offence you are facing today. (This would have been his drug charges, which happened before the army.
    This means that Luke had a separate disciplinary action or hearing while employed full-time by the Canadian Army. We don’t know what that is, but we do know that Luke DID have at least one assault charge for sure. This would be in addition (one would assume) from whatever this indecent on his conduct sheet might be.

    Luke probably fails to tell anyone during trials that he had previously been court martialed and charged with munitions charges. This would have likely affect the court’s decisions based on the fact that the activity Luke seems to admit to doing, is a contravention of the Canadian Firearms Act; and would represent a pattern of firearms abuse.

    [76] However, Mr. Halstead admitted that shortly after the recommendations of the
    JFCS child protection worker and the OCL clinical investigator, Mr. Halstead took Thomas
    to a shooting range on Crown land where Mr. Halstead then created an explosive device
    using Tannerite taped to a saline bag on a propane tank, taped to a tree. He and Thomas then
    watched it explode. This occurred during their two week summer holiday together in July of
    2016.
    [110] Ms Roth believes that despite the OCL recommendations that Thomas not be
    exposed to firearms, the father continues to do so and that the father does not respect Thomas’s wishes in this regard. She cites the Tannerite explosive device incident that occurred during Thomas’s summer holiday with his father in July of 2016 as an example. This incident occurred after the 2016 recommendations of the both the OCL investigator and the children’s aid society that Thomas not be exposed to firearms.
    [267] When told during cross-examination that after the release of the OCL Report and
    recommendations, the father had exposed Thomas to an explosion on a shooting range near
    his property, Ms. Barlas testified that she would be very concerned about this given Thomas’
    clear views and preferences about being exposed to gun activity.
    [313] The father’s decision to arrange for an explosive device to be detonated in a
    shooting range during his summer holidays with Thomas only months after the OCL
    clinician recommended that Thomas not be exposed to guns or gun activity was ill advised to
    say the least and an example of very poor judgment. The father’ evidence that he did not
    recall whether he used a gun to cause the explosion was not credible and simply did not
    accord with common sense.
    As with the pattern of firearms abuse – if Luke was the offender in the earlier assault incident cited in R. v. Braithwaite, 2010; and if the incident on the conduct sheet is at all related to assault, how is it that those records would have been expunged?

    If the facts here are lined up:

    • It seems that Luke maybe have had an assault incident that is sealed due to the fact that he was underaged at the time.

    • He had an assault charge (for which he received probation) expunged as an adult. This was an incident that happened while he was an adult.

    • He has a second (non-munitions) entry on his army conduct sheet that likely the Superior Court did not know about at the time his records were expunged. It seems clear that, as with the munitions charges, he also fails to mention his previous assault-related incidents when he went before the court to request his records be expunged.

    Luke does brag about being able to ‘get out of trouble’ because of his job and uniform as a paramedic. Specifically, multiple traffic violations.

    When an officer stops a person for a traffic violation, is a record kept of the ‘search’ on the license plate, even when no charge or official warning is given to the driver?
    – If so, it’s likely there is a long list of traffic stops associate with Luke, but with no charges or fine levied.

    He has abused so many women. He raped a Toronto woman and pushed another down some stairs.

  10. Anonymous helperJanuary 23, 2019 at 12:57 PM

    From an anonymous source. We are pointing you here to publicly available information, with references on CanLii. We feel sorry for everything the women are going through and want to be of assistance but will remain anonymous.

    Citation: Roth v. Halstead, 2017 ONCJ 593 – 2017-07-31
    From the Judgment of Justice O’Connell:

    [24] In July of 2010, the father brought an ex parte motion for custody of Thomas. According to the father, the mother had quit her job without a contingency plan and could no longer afford her rent and was facing homelessness. Mr. Halstead deposed that the mother was behaving in an increasingly erratic manner and that she was financially and emotionally unstable so he offered to take Thomas for a period of time.

    [25] Mr. Halstead obtained a temporary without prejudice custody order of Thomas and brought him to his home in Pembroke. Mr. Halstead then abandoned his application in August of 2010 when Ms Roth agreed to move to his mother’s basement apartment, where she had lived previously and been assisted by the paternal grandmother. Mr. Halstead returned Thomas to Ms Roth’s primary care shortly after that.

    As it turns out – This is also when Luke’s Court Martial took place according to the public records. The actual date when the ‘offense’ for this court martial took place is unknown, but it can be assumed, based on the seriousness of the charge, it was shortly before the trial:

    It’s assumed that Luke failed to inform the judges, that he was scheduled to attend a court martial only 5 days later to face charges “for having in your possession without lawful excuse a number of blank and live ammunition and different grenades, simulators, basically, pyrotechnic devices.” He was found guilty.

    Citation: R. v. Halstead, 2010 CM 3018 – 2010-09-01
    The Judge noted:
    • “But the quantity is a very serious aggravating factor. You kept a lot, which is very unusual; it’s more than keeping a souvenir in your house.”
    • “The other thing is the type of ammunition; hand grenades, simulators, or trip flares contain substances which are very dangerous, especially—and it brings me to the second aggravating factor I consider—is the place for storing all those things.”
    • “You bring this at your home. You know in the Canadian Forces we keep that in a special place in order to avoid—for security reasons and because we don’t want to have all people accessing this and playing with that. You brought this at your house. So I understand that from your perspective you probably had access to this, but it also means that others may have access to this, and other people that may come in your house, not having a clue how to handle this, and expose themselves to any kind of injury or any other thing.”
    • “…but you didn’t have on your mind how dangerous it could have been if somebody, not knowing how to use this, would have played with that.”
    • “It’s difficult to the court to reconcile the fact that you’re wearing this appointment and that you kept all those things at your home. You should have, at some point, decided to bring back all those things knowing how dangerous it could have been for yourself and anybody else.”

    Citation: R. v. Halstead, [1999] O.J. No. 5418 (SCJ) [MISSING!].
    Referenced in: R. v. Pangan, 2014 ONCJ 327 (CanLII) and R. v. Braithwaite, 2010 MBPC 53 (CanLII)

    From R. v. Braithwaite, 2010:

    [17… In R. v. Halstead, [1999] O.J. No. 5418, a decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, an offender, with four others, participated in the savage beating of a victim. The victim was chosen at random and attacked for money and to steal his stereo. The group beat him into unconsciousness, broke some of his teeth and permanently mangled one ear. The offender was 19 at the time and lived on the street where he abused alcohol and drugs. He had no prior record and was on bail for nine moths with no problems. He had addressed his substance abuse and was back in school. He was sentenced to 15 months imprisonment and probation. An important factor was that by the time of sentencing, he did not seem to be a continuing risk to the community. …

    Luke was 17 at the time just turning 18; however, sometimes they get the ages wrong. Information is not always accurate. Luke has allegedly had a criminal record that he had expunged. This was from a period when Luke was an adult. We don’t know the exact date of the 1999 incident or when it was expunged. Since it was expunged, the records cannot be searched.

    Everything else lines up, substance abuse, homelessness etc

    Also, from the Court Martial:

    [12] c. The fact that you did not have an entry on your conduct sheet related to similar offences. Despite the fact that you have a conduct sheet, the entry on it has no relation, as mentioned by your counsel, to the facts or to the kind of offence you are facing today. (This would have been his drug charges, which happened before the army.

    This means that Luke had a separate disciplinary action or hearing while employed full-time by the Canadian Army. We don’t know what that is, but we do know that Luke DID have at least one assault charge for sure. This would be in addition (one would assume) from whatever this indecent on his conduct sheet might be.

    Luke probably fails to tell anyone during trials that he had previously been court martialed and charged with munitions charges. This would have likely affect the court’s decisions based on the fact that the activity Luke seems to admit to doing, is a contravention of the Canadian Firearms Act; and would represent a pattern of firearms abuse.

    [76] However, Mr. Halstead admitted that shortly after the recommendations of the
    JFCS child protection worker and the OCL clinical investigator, Mr. Halstead took Thomas
    to a shooting range on Crown land where Mr. Halstead then created an explosive device
    using Tannerite taped to a saline bag on a propane tank, taped to a tree. He and Thomas then
    watched it explode. This occurred during their two week summer holiday together in July of
    2016.

    [110] Ms Roth believes that despite the OCL recommendations that Thomas not be
    exposed to firearms, the father continues to do so and that the father does not respect Thomas’s wishes in this regard. She cites the Tannerite explosive device incident that occurred during Thomas’s summer holiday with his father in July of 2016 as an example. This incident occurred after the 2016 recommendations of the both the OCL investigator and the children’s aid society that Thomas not be exposed to firearms.

    [267] When told during cross-examination that after the release of the OCL Report and
    recommendations, the father had exposed Thomas to an explosion on a shooting range near
    his property, Ms. Barlas testified that she would be very concerned about this given Thomas’
    clear views and preferences about being exposed to gun activity.

    [313] The father’s decision to arrange for an explosive device to be detonated in a
    shooting range during his summer holidays with Thomas only months after the OCL
    clinician recommended that Thomas not be exposed to guns or gun activity was ill advised to
    say the least and an example of very poor judgment. The father’ evidence that he did not
    recall whether he used a gun to cause the explosion was not credible and simply did not
    accord with common sense.

    As with the pattern of firearms abuse – if Luke was the offender in the earlier assault incident cited in R. v. Braithwaite, 2010; and if the incident on the conduct sheet is at all related to assault, how is it that those records would have been expunged?

    If the facts here are lined up:

    • It seems that Luke maybe have had an assault incident that is sealed due to the fact that he was underaged at the time.

    • He had an assault charge (for which he received probation) expunged as an adult. This was an incident that happened while he was an adult.

    • He has a second (non-munitions) entry on his army conduct sheet that likely the Superior Court did not know about at the time his records were expunged. It seems clear that, as with the munitions charges, he also fails to mention his previous assault-related incidents when he went before the court to request his records be expunged.

    Luke does brag about being able to ‘get out of trouble’ because of his job and uniform as a paramedic. Specifically, multiple traffic violations.

    When an officer stops a person for a traffic violation, is a record kept of the ‘search’ on the license plate, even when no charge or official warning is given to the driver?
    – If so, it’s likely there is a long list of traffic stops associate with Luke, but with no charges or fine levied.

  11. MichaelJuly 15, 2018 at 2:39 PM

    Yeah I saw that… It’s on the canlii website Roth v Halstead right? Michelle tried to talk to Luke’s mom about getting help for Luke’s sociopath traits but his mom didn’t wanna believe it. Hope she believes it now that other girls saw the same in him and he sexually assaulted that other girl. We never want to see the bad in our own FAM.

    seems like a dude with a sex addiction too… read all the other posts on this guy. Whatever’s going on with this guy just hope he gets the support he needs.

  12. Michelle's friendJuly 14, 2018 at 1:19 PM

    sane*

  13. Michelle's friendJuly 14, 2018 at 9:33 AM

    Don’t forget the slandering normally same girls with borderline personality disorder. He did that to Michelle, Jade and Lindsay and I think he was in contempt twice too