J. Martel

The appellant appealed his conviction for assault causing bodily harm, arguing that the verdict was unreasonable because the trial judge failed to recognize that video evidence of the incident had been modified.

The Superior Court of Justice dismissed the appeal, finding that the trial judge properly assessed the video's reliability and appropriately relied on the victim's testimony while rejecting the appellant's evidence.

The court concluded that the verdict was reasonable and supported by the evidence.

The accused, charged with first-degree murder, applied for judicial interim release.

The Crown opposed bail on the secondary and tertiary grounds under s. 515(10) of the Criminal Code.

The court found that the accused's proposed electronic monitoring plan sufficiently addressed the secondary ground by minimizing the risk to public safety.

However, the court denied bail on the tertiary ground, concluding that detention was necessary to maintain public confidence in the administration of justice due to the strength of the Crown's case, the gravity of the offence, and the accused's extensive criminal record.