Elizabeth Bingham

In a trial for second-degree murder, the accused brought a pre-trial application to exclude or edit a video recording of the killing, arguing the graphic images would inflame the jury.

The Crown voluntarily edited the video to conceal the pooling of blood and the gunshot wound to the deceased's head.

The court ruled the edited video recording was admissible, finding its probative value in showing the factual circumstances of the murder substantially outweighed any potential prejudice to the accused.

The appellant appealed a summary conviction for uttering threats against a correctional officer and the 90‑day consecutive custodial sentence imposed.

The appeal alleged that the trial judge misapprehended the significance of video evidence and improperly relied on opinion evidence regarding intent.

The Superior Court held that the trial judge materially misapprehended the video evidence by treating it as directly contradicting the appellant’s account when it merely lacked audio and did not capture all interactions.

Because credibility was central and the video evidence was heavily relied upon in the reasoning process, the misapprehension constituted a reversible error.

The conviction appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered, while the sentence appeal was dismissed.