The accused was charged with extortion, simple assault, and aggravated assault against a vulnerable complainant with schizophrenia.
The Crown's case relied heavily on the complainant's eyewitness identification of the accused as the perpetrator, a man who regularly attended his apartment.
The defence argued mistaken identity, presenting evidence that the accused was known by a different name and that another man matching the description existed.
Applying the W.(D.) framework, the court found the complainant's identification unreliable due to substance use, inconsistencies, and cross-racial identification frailties.
The court also noted a failure by police to investigate an alternative suspect linked to DNA at the scene.
The accused was acquitted on all counts.
