The accused was charged with uttering a threat to bomb Gilly's Pubhouse, mischief, breach of probation, and public mischief.
The sole issue at trial was whether the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused made the bomb threat call.
The Crown's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including testimony from the doorman who heard the accused threaten to call in a bomb threat, and voice identification evidence from police officers.
The court found the voice identification evidence unreliable and placed no weight on it.
However, based on the totality of the circumstantial evidence—including the accused's explicit threat, his agitation, the timing and location of the 911 call, and his presence at the scene—the court found the accused guilty of all four charges.
