The appellant was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder.
At trial, he claimed to have suffered from post-traumatic stress disorder and amnesia, rendering him unable to remember the events.
The defence introduced statements the appellant made during a court-ordered psychiatric assessment, which the Crown then cross-examined him on.
The appellant appealed his convictions, arguing the trial judge erred by failing to caution the jury against using disbelief of his amnesia as circumstantial evidence of guilt, by allowing cross-examination on protected statements under s. 672.21 of the Criminal Code, and by failing to instruct the jury not to rely on third-party opinions of his truthfulness.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding no errors in the jury instructions and holding that the appellant waived the protection of s. 672.21 by introducing the statements himself.
