This ruling addresses a Browne and Dunn argument made by the Crown in closing addresses during a murder trial where the accused was convicted of manslaughter.
The judge provided a mild corrective instruction to the jury, explaining that counsel cannot argue Browne and Dunn to the jury without first raising it with the trial judge.
The judge found that in this specific case, no actual Browne and Dunn violation occurred as there was no ambush or surprise in the defence evidence.
The ruling concluded that the Crown's misstep caused no lasting harm given the jury's verdict of manslaughter.
