The appellant was charged with arson after a fire destroyed his clothing store.
At the close of the Crown's case, which rested entirely on circumstantial evidence, the trial judge directed a verdict of acquittal, finding the evidence gave rise only to suspicion.
The Court of Appeal set aside the acquittal and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial judge usurped the function of the jury by weighing the evidence.
Applying the Shephard test, the Court found there was admissible circumstantial evidence relating to motive, opportunity, and contradictions in the appellant's statement that, if believed by a properly instructed jury, could justify a conviction.
