Morris P. Bodnar

The accused was convicted of second degree murder based largely on the testimony of a jailhouse informant who claimed the accused admitted to wiping down the crime scene to remove DNA.

The trial judge gave a Vetrovec warning but failed to mention the informant's potential motives to lie, such as a reward and pending charges.

The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to the inadequate warning.

The Crown appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada, and the accused sought to introduce fresh DNA evidence showing his DNA on additional items in the room, contradicting the wiping down theory.

The Supreme Court admitted the fresh evidence, finding it could reasonably have affected the jury's assessment of the informant's credibility, and dismissed the Crown's appeal, affirming the order for a new trial.

The accused was convicted of attempting to obstruct justice after a fire in a residential building he managed.

The trial judge found he attempted to falsify smoke alarm inspection records and rejected his testimony.

The Court of Appeal set aside the conviction, reasoning his conduct could be explained by a desire to have perfect records rather than an intent to obstruct.

The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Crown's appeal and restored the conviction, holding that an appellate court cannot acquit based on speculation about an alternative explanation that is flatly contradicted by the accused's own testimony.