The defendant was charged with failing to stop at a red traffic light contrary to section 144(18) of the Highway Traffic Act.
The central issue was whether the defendant entered an intersection while facing a red light or a green light.
The prosecution presented four witnesses who testified that the defendant ran a red light, while the defendant testified that he faced a green light.
The court applied the credibility assessment principles from R. v. W.(D.) and found the prosecution witnesses credible and reliable, particularly an independent witness who had an optimal vantage point to observe both traffic signals.
The defendant's testimony was found to be unreliable and inconsistent with the preponderance of prosecution evidence.
The court convicted the defendant.
