The accused was tried on charges arising from a fatal ATV rollover after a night of social drinking.
The court held that the Crown failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's ability to operate the vehicle was impaired by alcohol, preferring the evidence of the eyewitness and attending officer over unreliable lay observations from other young witnesses.
The court further held that, even if impairment had been proven, causation was not established because the rollover was explained by the vehicle's instability and sharp turning capability at low speed.
The accused was acquitted of impaired driving causing death and over-80 causing death, but convicted of taking the ATV without consent.
