During a trial, the defence brought a motion requiring the Crown to produce the defendant's complete police statement to the jury.
The defence argued that the Crown's re-examination of the lead investigator left the jury with the prejudicial understanding that the defendant had provided a statement.
The court dismissed the motion, finding that the Crown's questions did not infer any statement was given to the police, and noted that the defence had improperly delayed bringing the application until after the Crown closed its case.
