The accused was charged with aggravated assault, robbery, and break and enter.
The central issue was the identity of the accused as one of the perpetrators.
The Crown relied on circumstantial evidence, including the accused's fingerprints found on a drug jar at the scene, cell phone records, and the accused's prior lies to the police.
The defence presented an alibi and argued that the fingerprints could have been left during earlier, legitimate drug transactions with the victim.
The court found the accused and his alibi witness not credible due to inconsistencies and vagueness.
However, the court also found the victim's testimony to be inconsistent and unreliable, particularly regarding his memory, the identity of "TYBO" (a client recorded in his drug book), and the frequency of washing his drug jars.
Given the conflicting evidence and the victim's lack of credibility on key points, the court was not satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's guilt was the only reasonable inference.
The accused was found not guilty on all counts.
