The accused was charged with two counts of assault by choking, attempted murder, discharging a firearm with intent, and aggravated assault against his former spouse.
The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, including the accused's absence from work, DNA on a hat left at the scene, his subsequent arson of the matrimonial home, and his motive regarding family law proceedings.
The court found the complainant's evidence regarding the prior assaults credible and concluded that the only reasonable inference from the circumstantial evidence was that the accused was the shooter and intended to kill the complainant.
The accused was found guilty on all counts.
