M. Bellmore

The accused was charged with 13 firearm-related offences, dangerous driving, and flight from police.

Following a shooting where the accused was targeted, he allegedly pursued the shooter, fired back, and hid his gun in a bag in nearby bushes.

The police found the bag, which contained the prohibited firearm along with the accused's identification documents.

The accused claimed he was merely an innocent bystander hiding from the gunfire.

Applying the W.(D.) principles, the court rejected the accused's exculpatory statements and found that the circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness testimony and the contents of the bag, proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused possessed and discharged the firearm.

The accused was found guilty on all counts.

The accused was charged with multiple offences arising from a series of alleged domestic assaults against his spouse over a two‑year period, including assault, assault with a weapon, uttering threats to cause death, sexual assault, and unlawful confinement.

The case turned primarily on credibility assessments between the complainant and the accused, with supporting testimony from a family member and a community counsellor, as well as medical and documentary evidence.

The court applied the principles from R. v. W.(D.) in assessing the accused’s testimony and emphasized that the burden of proof remained on the Crown.

After rejecting the accused’s evidence as not credible and accepting the complainant’s evidence as reliable and internally consistent, the court found the Crown had proven each count beyond a reasonable doubt.