Listen to this article
Estimated 3 minutes
The audio version of this article is generated by AI-based technology. Mispronunciations can occur. We are working with our partners to continually review and improve the results.
The Calgary man accused of tunnelling into his upstairs neighbour’s apartment ran his own criminal trial Monday.
Ben Maize is charged with mischief, and break and enter.
In the summer of 2025, Maize and his neighbour Betty Golightly lived in the same condo building in the southwest community of Coach Hill.
Golightly testified that she arrived home on Sept. 5 to find her apartment locked from the inside, then discovered holes in the drywall near her fireplace that appeared to lead to a tunnel to the unit below.
‘Banging on my floor’
Golightly and Maize had been involved in a neighbour dispute leading up to that point, although few details were revealed in court during the one-day trial.
Golightly testified that on July 10, she arrived home, entered her apartment and then believed Maize was banging on his ceiling.
“There was a banging on my floor and that followed me around wherever I went,” she told Justice Eric Tolppanen.
There was another interaction between Golightly and Maize that took place at her door on Aug. 2. She testified that she recorded the four-minute conversation but none of the details were provided to the court and the video was not played at the trial.
‘In fear for my safety’
Golightly said she’d been staying on and off with her sister and brother-in-law.
“I was in fear for my safety from the neighbour below,” said Golightly in her testimony.
Maize is accused of tunnelling into Golightly’s apartment at some point between Aug. 5 and Sept. 5.
Golightly testified that when she discovered the damage, she also noticed one of her dresser drawers was tossed, her pantry door was not closed, a table had been moved, and her shower curtain was not as she’d left it.
‘No proof’
Maize represented himself at trial, although an amicus lawyer was appointed by the court to cross-examine Golightly so that she didn’t have to be questioned by the man accused of breaking into her home.
In his closing arguments, Maize pointed out that the condo building had recently undergone renovations to its balconies, and that there were scaffolding and workers present who could have had access to the units.
“The Crown has presented no proof I was ever in Ms. Golightly’s apartment,” argued Maize.
“There is no proof I caused the damage to the flooring between our homes … or in her apartment.”
‘Very unusual set of circumstances’
Prosecutor Petter Hurich pointed out there is “some kind of animus between the parties.”
Hurich said it was “a very unusual set of circumstances to have a passageway between these two residences.”
He argued that the “only explanation is that it was made by someone with access to these two residences.”
Tolppanen will make his decision in the coming weeks.
