The appellant was convicted of first degree murder for driving a taxi from which a youth shot and killed the deceased.
The Crown's case relied on evidence from two witnesses: the front-seat passenger who testified that the appellant knew of the plan to kill the deceased, and the shooter himself who testified that the appellant had no knowledge of his plan.
The trial judge made numerous interventions during the shooter's testimony, expressing disparaging views about his credibility and reliability.
The trial judge also gave a Vetrovec instruction regarding the shooter's evidence, permitted re-examination of the passenger on prior consistent statements, and instructed the jury on the standard of proof.
The appellant appealed on five grounds.