The accused was tried before a judge alone on charges of robbery, wearing a disguise with intent to commit an indictable offence, and conspiracy to commit robbery arising from an attempted armed carjacking by three masked men.
The Crown's case on identity was wholly circumstantial and relied on eyewitness evidence, an abandoned BMW linked to the offence, the accused's driver's licence and fingerprint in that vehicle, surveillance video showing two men near where the vehicle was abandoned, and clothing seized from the accused's residence matching distinctive clothing seen on video.
Applying the circumstantial evidence framework, the court held that guilt was the only reasonable inference and found the accused guilty on all three counts.
The court nevertheless expressed concern about the propriety of adding a conspiracy count where the only evidence of agreement was the commission of the substantive offence, and invited submissions on the rule against multiple convictions and possible severance.
