The appellant was charged with kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault, and first degree murder as a party to the offences committed by a co-accused.
The trial judge acquitted the appellant, finding he lacked the requisite knowledge of the co-accused's intention to commit the crimes.
The Court of Appeal overturned the acquittals and ordered a new trial, holding that the trial judge erred in law by failing to consider the doctrine of wilful blindness.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, confirming that wilful blindness can substitute for actual knowledge and that the trial judge's failure to consider it constituted a legal error necessitating a new trial.
