During a jury trial for importing cocaine, the accused raised the defence of duress, testifying she and her son were forced at gunpoint to carry the drugs.
In cross-examination, the Crown suggested an alternate theory that the accused initially agreed to carry the drugs voluntarily but was only coerced when the perpetrators forced her son to participate.
The accused denied this.
The court ruled that the Crown could not advance this alternate theory to the jury, finding it lacked an air of reality and was purely speculative, as there was no direct or circumstantial evidence to support it.
