The appellant appealed his conviction for first degree murder, arguing the trial judge made several errors in his charge to the jury.
The appellant contended the trial judge failed to review the position of the defence, erred in responding to a jury question about an alternative suspect, introduced a speculative theory of planning and deliberation, and gave an inadequate Vetrovec warning regarding the key Crown witness.
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, finding that while the trial judge's failure to explicitly set out the defence position was ill-advised, the charge as a whole conveyed a sufficient understanding of the issues.
The court also found no reversible errors in the response to the jury question, the instructions on planning and deliberation, or the Vetrovec warning.
