Detective Inspector Kathryn Lines

The appellant was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder after the elderly victims were stabbed in their sleep.

The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, including the appellant's motive, opportunity, blood on his track pants, and a confession to an undercover officer.

The trial judge admitted expert evidence from a police officer regarding crime scene reconstruction and criminal profiling.

On appeal, the appellant challenged the admission of the expert evidence, demeanour evidence, and the conduct of Crown counsel.

The Court of Appeal held that while the criminal profiling evidence was inadmissible, the crime scene reconstruction evidence was properly admitted.

The court applied the curative proviso to the profiling evidence, finding the case against the appellant overwhelming, and dismissed the appeal.

The appellant appealed convictions for first degree murder and manslaughter arising from the stabbing deaths of two sisters.

The court held that the trial was unfair due to multiple reversible errors, including the admission of expert evidence that strayed from crime scene staging into inadmissible criminal profiling, the admission and mishandling of prejudicial after-the-fact conduct evidence related to a trip to Jamaica, improper Crown submissions and jury instructions about a supposed false alibi unsupported by any evidence, the introduction in the charge of an additional theory of liability without notice to the defence, and inadequate instructions on weak identification evidence.

The cumulative effect of these errors required a new trial.

Because the Crown did not cross-appeal the manslaughter conviction, the new trial was ordered on first degree murder with respect to one victim and manslaughter with respect to the other.