The defendant, Aziel Bailey, was charged with possessing over 30g of cannabis for distribution, contrary to s. 9(2) of the Cannabis Act.
The trial focused on whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was in possession of the large quantity of cannabis found in the residence he fled.
The court assessed the credibility of police witnesses and the defendant.
The defendant's testimony, which attempted to explain his presence in the residence and his flight, was rejected as implausible and untruthful.
Based on the cumulative circumstantial evidence, including the defendant's flight, the contents of his satchel, the presence of drugs in adjoining residences, the smell of cannabis, and his non-compliance with police commands, the court concluded that the defendant was fully aware of and maintained control over the cannabis.
The court found the defendant guilty.