A youth was charged with robbery while using a firearm following a bank robbery on December 29, 2010.
The Crown's case rested primarily on fingerprint evidence found on the interior exit door of the bank and eyewitness testimony.
The accused was not the actual robber but the second youth who entered and exited the bank with the robber.
The court found serious deficiencies in the expert fingerprint evidence, including failure to provide a proper expert report, disclosure violations, documentary errors, and use of prints from a different arrest date without disclosure.
The court also found insufficient evidence of the use of a firearm and no evidence of the accused's knowledge or participation in the robbery beyond mere presence.
The accused was acquitted of all charges.