Dr. Ashwyn Rajagopalan

The youth accused was charged with second-degree murder following a fatal stabbing during a drug transaction.

The deceased and others had planned to rob the accused.

When the deceased approached the accused wearing a mask and drawing a large knife, the accused reacted by drawing his own knife and stabbing the deceased multiple times.

The court excluded the accused's subsequent statement to police, finding it lacked spontaneity.

However, applying the W.(D.) framework, the court accepted the accused's testimony that he believed he was about to be stabbed and acted to protect himself.

The Crown failed to disprove self-defence beyond a reasonable doubt, resulting in an acquittal.

During a murder trial, the defence applied for a mistrial based on alleged misrepresentations and misstatements made by the Crown in its closing address to the jury.

The defence argued that the Crown's comments regarding DNA evidence, witness immunity, and the accused's testimony fatally wounded the trial process.

The court reviewed the eight alleged errors and concluded that while some statements were inaccurate or lacked an evidentiary basis, they did not individually or cumulatively constitute a fatal wounding of the trial process.

The court dismissed the application, finding that the errors could be adequately addressed through limiting instructions to the jury.

The applicant, charged with second degree murder, brought a pre-trial motion to admit evidence of the deceased's disposition for aggressive and provocative behaviour when intoxicated.

The applicant intended to argue self-defence at trial.

The court considered whether evidence of the deceased 'beaking off' to strangers was logically relevant to the issue of who was the aggressor in the fatal confrontation.

The court ruled the evidence admissible, finding it minimally supportive of the deceased's aggressive nature when drinking and concluding its probative value was not substantially outweighed by potential prejudice.