The accused was charged with robbery arising from a bank robbery in Ottawa where the perpetrator threatened a teller and fled with cash before discarding clothing and sunglasses containing DNA evidence.
DNA recovered from the sunglasses strongly matched the accused’s profile and weaker DNA evidence linked him to the jacket found nearby.
Eyewitnesses provided only general physical descriptions and could not identify the perpetrator.
The court held that while the DNA evidence and circumstantial factors made it very probable that the accused committed the robbery, the forensic evidence could not establish when the DNA was deposited and required supporting evidence connecting the accused to the crime at the relevant time.
Applying the reasonable doubt standard, the court found the evidence insufficient to prove identity beyond a reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused.
