The appellant was convicted of forgery-related offences and tax fraud arising from his operation of a fake identification business and failure to report income.
On appeal, he argued the trial judge erred by preventing him from reopening his case, improperly finding him vicariously liable as a 'directing mind', misapplying the co-conspirators' exception to the hearsay rule, relying on inadmissible affidavits, unevenly scrutinizing evidence, reversing the burden of proof for tax fraud, and dismissing a stay application for pre-charge delay.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding the trial judge made no legal errors, properly assessed the evidence, and correctly concluded that the appellant directly controlled the illegal business and deliberately evaded taxes.