Court File and Parties
Court File No.: 35/18 Date: 2018 09 28 Ontario Superior Court of Justice
Between: Her Majesty the Queen – and – Innocent N. Annih
Counsel: A. Jodouin, for the Crown C. White, for the Accused
Heard: September 10, 11, 12, 13, 17 & 18, 2018
Reasons for Judgment
Conlan J.
I. Introduction
[1] On May 11, 2016, someone rented a mailbox at a store (“Envoy”) in Port Perry, Ontario. The person, a woman, identified herself as and had a Driver’s Licence in the name of Sharon Kaye. No record of that person exists in the Ontario Ministry of Transportation’s database.
[2] A similar thing happened on September 24, 2016. That time a mailbox was rented at a store (“UPS”) in Georgetown, Ontario. That time the name given was Doris Makie Beacroft. Again, neither that name nor the Driver’s Licence number presented by the woman exists in the Ministry’s database.
[3] Notwithstanding the two different names, the Driver’s Licences presented to the two stores had on them photos of the same woman. Obviously, the said pieces of identification were not genuine.
[4] The following month, in October 2016, three importations of heroin were intercepted by the Canadian authorities. 591 grams from Malaysia on October 9th, destined for Sharon Kaye at Envoy. 100 grams from India on October 10th, destined for Doris Beacroft at UPS. And 299 grams from Malaysia on October 16th, destined for Sharon Kaye at Envoy.
[5] Once the police became involved, they prepared controlled deliveries to Envoy and UPS. In other words, after discovering the concealed narcotics inside items which included children’s toys and purses and cardboard, the police substituted most of the heroin with something else, repackaged the parcels to avoid detection and hoped that someone would arrive at either or both stores to retrieve them. The attempts were unsuccessful as nobody tried to pick up the packages.
[6] After the controlled deliveries were terminated, however, the accused, Innocent Annih (“Annih”), did attend at both stores. He went to Envoy on October 27th. He went to UPS on November 4th and on November 7th. He was arrested by the police on the 7th.
[7] Upon his arrest at UPS in Georgetown, Annih’s cellular telephone was seized and later examined for data. In that telephone’s case was a business card for Envoy. His Nissan car key was also seized. That car was found by the police across the street in a separate parking lot, about 150 metres away from UPS.
[8] A subsequent police search of the Nissan revealed two sets of mailbox keys. One set opened the specific mailbox in question at Envoy.
[9] All of the above is taken from Exhibit 1 at trial, the Agreed Statement of Facts.
[10] Was Annih knowingly involved in the importations of the heroin? That is the question to be decided. The theory of the Defence is that the accused was duped.
[11] Annih was tried before me, without a jury, in Milton over six days. He faces three counts: conspiracy to import heroin between May 11th and November 7th, 2016 (count 1), attempted possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking on October 27th at Port Perry (count 2), and attempted possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking between November 4th and November 7th, 2016 at Halton Hills (Georgetown).
[12] Annih is presumed to be not guilty. That presumption of innocence applies to each charge and never ceases unless and until the prosecution meets its burden to prove every essential element of that charge beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof rests entirely with the state. Annih has no burden to prove anything. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt is a high threshold. It means more than probable or likely guilt. It requires that the trier be sure of Annih’s guilt before finding him so.
[13] Further, Annih testified at trial and denied knowing anything about the importations of the heroin. If I accept his evidence, he must be acquitted on all counts. Even if I do not necessarily accept his evidence but find that it leaves me with a reasonable doubt, he must be acquitted. If I completely reject his evidence, he still must be acquitted unless the rest of the evidence at trial that I do accept persuades me of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
[14] As Annih is facing multiple counts, I must also remember that the verdicts need not necessarily be the same. Having said that, the Defence concedes that findings of guilt ought to be entered on counts 2 and 3 (attempted possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking) if this Court decides that the Crown has met its burden of proof on count 1 (conspiracy to import heroin).
[15] On count 1, conspiracy to import heroin, the Crown must prove each of these essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (i) that there was a conspiracy, or an agreement, between two or more persons, and (ii) that the conspiracy or agreement was to import heroin into Canada, and (iii) that Annih was a member of that conspiracy or agreement.
[16] On counts 2 and 3, an attempt to commit an offence (here, possession of heroin for the purpose of trafficking in it) requires an intent to commit that offence and some act or omission on the part of Annih for the purpose of carrying out his intention. Something more than mere preparation is required.
[17] The Crown’s case against Annih is a circumstantial one. There is no onus on the accused to prove any facts. In addition, reasonable doubt is assessed on the totality of all of the evidence adduced at trial, including the lack or absence of evidence. If there are reasonable inferences other than guilt, then the prosecution has not discharged its burden. R. v. Villaroman, 2016 SCC 33, [2016] S.C.J. No. 33, at paragraph 35.
[18] Put another way, gaps in the evidence may result in inferences other than guilt. As long as those inferences, assessed logically and with common sense, are reasonable ones, an acquittal ought to be entered. R. v. Villaroman, supra, at paragraph 36.
[19] This Court should consider other plausible theories and other reasonable possibilities which are inconsistent with guilt. To prove its case to the requisite criminal standard, the Crown may need to negative those reasonable possibilities, however, it is not incumbent on the prosecution to address every possible conjecture, no matter how irrational, fanciful or speculative, that might be consistent with innocence. R. v. Villaroman, supra, at paragraph 37.
[20] It is not always easy to draw a bright line between a plausible theory and mere conjecture. The main question will always be whether the circumstantial evidence, viewed logically and in light of human experience and common sense, is reasonably capable of supporting an inference other than that the accused is guilty. R. v. Villaroman, supra, at paragraph 38.
[21] At the end of the day, this Court must be satisfied that the only rational or reasonable inference to be drawn is that Annih is guilty. The totality of the evidence, including the absence of evidence, must be considered. It is not an exercise in piecing out individual items to be weighed in isolation but rather one designed to assess each evidentiary point in relation to the whole. Put another way, the cogency of all of the facts as a whole is what really matters.
II. Analysis
[22] The facts are important in every criminal case but especially where, as here, both counsel agree that the verdicts on the charges facing the accused will be driven by what factual inferences this Court draws from the circumstantial evidence much more so than the law.
A Brief Summary of the Evidence at Trial
[23] Besides the Agreed Statement of Facts, this Court heard from a number of witnesses and received several Exhibits.
[24] Chris Gibbons (“Gibbons”) of the Halton Regional Police is the officer in charge. He searched Annih’s Nissan after the arrest. Some exacto-style knives and blades, scissors and latex gloves were found inside the trunk. In the main cabin was a handwritten note with the UPS address and that of another shipping store in Burlington, Ontario. Also in the main cabin were some keys – one set for a Toyota, one set with a red plastic holder, and one set with a blue plastic holder. The two keys with the blue tag had “210” on them. 210 was the mailbox number in question at UPS.
[25] Gibbons examined the GPS device inside the Nissan. The “recently found” addresses included both the Envoy and the UPS.
[26] Gibbons was cross-examined on a variety of topics that go to the depth of the investigation. As just two examples of many relied upon by the Defence, the police do not know much about the alleged exporter or sender of the heroin, and further, the police did nothing to examine the bank account of the accused referenced in the data extracted from his cellular telephone.
[27] Kevin Polisak (“Polisak”) of the Canada Border Services Agency is the one who, on October 9, 2016, discovered the heroin concealed among toys contained in a courier package. His evidence is in no way contentious.
[28] Tony Dhillon (“Dhillon”) of the RCMP received the package that had been intercepted by Polisak. Nothing turns on Dhillon’s evidence.
[29] Kerrilynn Hyrciuk (“Hyrciuk”) of the Canada Border Services Agency is the one who, on October 10, 2016, discovered the heroin concealed in purses that were contained in a package. Her evidence is in no way contentious.
[30] Kevin Magee of the Halton Regional Police received the parcel that had been intercepted by Hyrciuk. He also tested some keys. The two keys attached to the blue plastic tag that had been seized from Annih’s Nissan fit the front door and mailbox 210 at UPS. Other keys that had been seized from Annih’s person did not fit mailbox 210.
[31] David Eskritt of the RCMP received a package that contained 299 grams of heroin concealed in the lids of watch boxes and in the cardboard flaps of the parcel itself. Nothing turns on his evidence.
[32] Lawrence Hui (”Hui”) of the Halton Regional Police was dispatched to the UPS store in Georgetown on November 7, 2016. A man was there enquiring about a package. Immediately after arriving at the store, Hui met Annih as the latter was exiting the front door. The interaction between the two men can readily be observed on the store video. Ultimately, that same day, Annih was arrested by another police officer.
[33] Alex Weatherill of the Halton Regional Police found the Nissan shortly after Annih was arrested on November 7th. It was parked in a separate lot across a multi-lane roadway, about 150 metres away from the UPS store. There is a small parking lot immediately in front of UPS, although not marked with signage.
[34] David Brooker (“Brooker”) is the owner and operator of Envoy. He confirmed that a woman rented mailbox 132. The contract, Exhibit 8, was identified. Near the end of May or in early June 2016, the renter, Sharon Kaye, picked up two packages for box 132. On October 18th, a man with an accent telephoned the store and enquired about two packages for box 132. He sounded like he was from Guyana. He called himself Greg Kaye. On October 27th, a man arrived at the store. In the meantime, the police had become involved. The man, conceded by the Defence to have been Annih, opened up mailbox 132 with a key. He then asked about packages for box 132. Brooker told him that they had already been released to an authorized person. Eventually, the man left and went across the street to a different parking lot. At the time, there were parking spaces available right in front of the store.
[35] According to Brooker, the man who came to the store on October 27th, conceded by the Defence to have been Annih, was the same man who telephoned the shop on October 18th. He believes that because of the man’s voice.
[36] This Court had an opportunity to listen to Annih’s voice. He certainly speaks with an accent, however, how distinctive it is would be hard to describe.
[37] Brooker testified that the same man telephoned the store again on November 1st. He called himself Greg Kaye. He asked who picked up the packages for mailbox 132. After Brooker faked the answer by simply describing the man himself as being the one who picked up the packages, the man got angry and made a threatening remark about the person who picked up the parcels.
[38] Vijaya Chaudhari (“Chaudhari”) is the owner and operator of the UPS store in Georgetown. She confirmed that a woman rented mailbox 210. The contract, Exhibit 7, was identified. UPS store video from November 4, 2016 was played in Court. A man, conceded by the Defence to be Annih, is seen entering the store and using a key to open box 210. A tag or notice is removed and given to Chaudhari. After several minutes of Chaudhari looking around the store, Annih exits without having retrieved any parcel.
[39] Chaudhari testified that the police had already become involved, and she simply made up a story to satisfy Annih. She told him that the package had been returned to the sender because too much time had passed since it arrived at the store.
[40] A second UPS video clip was played from three days later, November 7th. Annih is seen entering the store. He waits around for a while. He then leaves and is met at the front door by Hui.
[41] Chaudhari and the other employee present inside UPS on November 7th, Danielle Graham (”Graham”), who also testified at trial, had telephoned 9-1-1 when Annih arrived. Because Graham had reviewed the video footage from November 4th, immediately after Annih entered the store on November 7th, she recognized him as the customer associated with mailbox 210 and, thus, alerted Chaudhari to contact the police.
[42] According to Graham, one inside the store can see clearly out the glass frontage.
[43] Rodney Gray (“Gray”) of the RCMP, on consent, gave expert opinion evidence at trial regarding heroin and its use, value, production, importation and distribution.
[44] According to Gray, and as fairly conceded by the Defence, the quantities of these heroin shipments suggest that they were not for personal consumption but rather were intended to be trafficked.
[45] Gray testified that heroin is not produced in Canada. It must be imported from abroad. India and Malaysia, where the three packages in question were shipped from before arriving in Canada, are not source countries, but they are transit nations through which heroin commonly passes. Nigeria, which is where Annih is from, is another transit country. In fact, virtually any nation could be a transit country, that is, used by an exporter of heroin who wants to try to avoid the border scrutiny that comes with a package arriving directly from a high-risk source country like Afghanistan, for example.
[46] Gray places the total value of all of the heroin from the three parcels intercepted by the Canadian authorities at somewhere between $122,500.00 and $396,000.00.
[47] I would be remiss if I did not pause to say that I was very impressed with the evidence of Gray. He is extremely knowledgeable about the heroin trade. He did not overstate his opinions. He spoke clearly and in plain language. He showed no bias against the accused.
[48] At the conclusion of the case for the prosecution, the final witness who testified at trial was the accused, Annih. He adamantly and steadfastly denied any involvement in any scheme to import heroin into Canada. More narrowly, he denied the requisite knowledge that he was picking up packages that contained illegal contraband.
[49] Annih denied knowing anything about the contracts to rent the mailboxes at Envoy and UPS. He denied knowing anyone named Beacroft or Kaye. He denied ever using either of those names.
[50] Annih is currently 49 years old. He has no criminal history. He came to Canada as a refugee in June 1998 and became a Canadian citizen in July 2005. He is from Enugu, Nigeria. He speaks good English, but his first language is Igbo.
[51] After arriving in Ontario, Annih moved around a lot. As of the Fall of 2016, he was living in Etobicoke. He was working as a short-haul transport truck driver.
[52] Annih’s parents are deceased. He has no siblings in Canada. His father had multiple wives, and Annih has 14 siblings in total, all abroad.
[53] Annih has been married twice. His first marriage was in 2001. Later divorced, he has three boys with his first wife – 16, 15 and 12 years old. He is currently married to a woman who lives in Nigeria. That wedding occurred in Nigeria in December 2014. They have a three year-old daughter who lives in Nigeria.
[54] Between 2006 and 2014, Annih visited Nigeria four times, each visit lasting at least one month.
[55] For most of his life, Annih was a Catholic. He changed to the Pentecostal faith after coming to Canada. Since being in this country, he has attended Church regularly. He has also been an active member of charitable organizations that help persons both in Canada and in Nigeria – the Igbo Canadian Association, the Enugu State Association of Canada, the Nkanu Welfare Services of Canada and the Igbo Catholic Church of Toronto.
[56] According to Annih, he first met Nna Obiora (“Obiora”) on Easter Sunday in 2016. I pause here to note that the Crown theorizes that Obiora is one of the members of the conspiracy to import heroin into Canada. More specifically, he is the person who sent the heroin packages to Canada.
[57] At the Igbo Catholic Church of Toronto, Annih sat down with Obiora and others and talked with him briefly. At Obiora’s request, Annih gave to him his telephone number. Obiora is an elderly man. As such, according to Annih, he did not ask Obiora for his contact information as it would have been inappropriate, culturally, to do so.
[58] After that one occasion, Annih never heard from or saw Obiora until August 2016. During that month, Obiora telephoned Annih from Nigeria. Obiora said that he had some kind of family emergency in Nigeria.
[59] According to Annih, Obiora telephoned him again later in August 2016. He asked Annih for a favour but said that details would be given at a later time. Annih was not suspicious and did not push for any details because Obiora is an elder.
[60] Annih received some electronic messages from Obiora (Exhibit 5, tab B). Those messages included what we now know to be precise tracking numbers for two of the heroin packages. At the time, according to Annih, he did not know what the numbers meant. In cross-examination, Annih explained that he is not at all familiar with the shipping of packages generally and knows nothing about how to track a parcel online.
[61] Annih testified that he heard from Obiora again in September 2016, by telephone. Obiora referred to the favour that he had mentioned earlier. He said that he wanted Annih to pick up Christmas presents, a toy or toys, for Obiora’s children (in cross-examination, Annih acknowledged that those children lived at the time in Nigeria). Obiora went on to say that a lady would come and tell Annih where to go for the pick-ups. Annih agreed with the plan and suggested that he meet this lady at the Albion Mall that was located near his house. Annih told Obiora what vehicle he would be driving and where he would park. Obiora told Annih that the lady would be driving a silver Honda Accord.
[62] There was also at least one occasion when Annih telephoned Obiora (Exhibit 9, entry number 7).
[63] The meeting with the unknown lady happened. Annih described her driving up beside his car in the parking lot. The two vehicles were driver’s door to driver’s door, facing opposite directions. She gave to Annih a No Frills plastic bag. She said “have a good day”. He said “thank you”. That was the end of the brief encounter.
[64] Annih testified that the photo on the identification that was used to open the mailboxes at the two stores looks like the woman from the parking lot.
[65] According to Annih, the No Frills bag contained two keys with a blue tag, two keys with a red tag, a piece of paper with handwritten addresses on it, and an Envoy business card (remember that all of those items were seized by the police from Annih’s Nissan and from his person upon his arrest).
[66] As for the other things discovered by the police inside the trunk of Annih’s Nissan, he testified that the knives he used for work as a truck driver in cutting plastic wrapping on skids, and the latex gloves he used for washing, and the darker glove was heavier and used by him during deliveries.
[67] After the meeting with the lady in the parking lot, Annih continued to have contact with Obiora, as reflected in Exhibit 9. No suspicion was aroused in Annih.
[68] Obiora telephoned Annih to say that he had sent the tracking numbers for the packages. Obiora telephoned Annih again to ask for the Envoy information. Annih later telephoned Obiora to confirm that he had received the Envoy information.
[69] In direct examination at trial, Annih explained that, after attending at Envoy on October 27th and being told that the package was gone, Annih telephoned Obiora to advise him of that. In cross-examination, Annih testified that he did not contact Obiora but rather waited for Obiora to contact him.
[70] In any event, Annih denied in his evidence that he ever telephoned Envoy.
[71] Annih explained that the reason why he parked across the road when he went to Envoy is because he loves to walk.
[72] According to Annih, after two telephone calls from Obiora about a pick-up at UPS, Annih went to that store in Georgetown on November 4, 2016. He opened the mailbox and removed the notice inside. He gave that notice to the female employee. He waited for a while. He was then told that the parcel had been returned to the sender. That same day, he telephoned Obiora to explain the situation.
[73] Later, Obiora texted Annih, insisting that the package was still at UPS. Annih was asked by Obiora to return to the store. Thus, on November 7th, Annih did just that.
[74] Annih denied in his evidence that he tried to exit the store because he saw the police car pull up. He said that he decided to go outside because he was hot waiting around inside the shop from wearing a heavy winter jacket. That is when he met Hui at the door.
[75] After November 4th, according to Annih, he had no further communication with Obiora.
Findings
[76] For ease of reference, I repeat here what the prosecution must prove on count 1. On that charge, conspiracy to import heroin, the Crown must prove each of these essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt: (i) that there was a conspiracy, or an agreement, between two or more persons, and (ii) that the conspiracy or agreement was to import heroin into Canada, and (iii) that Annih was a member of that conspiracy or agreement.
[77] Both the Crown and the Defence agree that (i) and (ii) are satisfied. Further, both the Crown and the Defence agree that a finding of guilt on count 1 will result in convictions on counts 2 and 3.
[78] Thus, through the hard work and commendable advocacy of both counsel, this Court’s task is to answer one question, that is, whether Annih was a part of the conspiracy or agreement to import these packages of heroin into Canada.
[79] The case is over if I believe or am left in a reasonable doubt by the unshaken denials of Annih.
[80] However, I do not believe Annih’s evidence that he had no knowledge of the heroin. Further, his evidence does not leave me with a reasonable doubt.
[81] There are two bases for why I reject that evidence of the accused. First, it flies in the face of what I would term an overwhelming circumstantial case for the prosecution. Second, in many respects, I found Annih’s evidence to be unworthy of belief.
[82] Beginning with the second factor, as just some examples of the incredulity of the accused’s evidence, I find the following to be rather absurd:
(i) that a man (Obiora) who met Annih just one time and spoke with him briefly would entrust tens and tens of thousands of dollars in heroin to him;
(ii) that, even accounting for Annih’s Nigerian background and his unique cultural sensitivities, he would think it totally benign that a virtual stranger in a foreign country (Obiora) would call him out of the blue and arrange a clandestine meeting with an unknown woman in a parking lot in Ontario in order to get Christmas presents for his children;
(iii) that, in addition, he would not be a tad suspicious when it turns out that he has to attend at two different stores in two different cities, neither of which is his own, to retrieve gifts for children who live in Nigeria;
(iv) that a man (Annih) would wait around a UPS store for several minutes without difficulty but then decide to leave due to the warm temperature inside at the exact same moment, though entirely coincidental, that a police officer is arriving at the door;
(v) that a man (Annih) would park some distance away from a parcel pick-up store simply because he loves to walk; and
(vi) that a man (Obiora) would ask for information about a pick-up store (Envoy) when that man had already sent the packages and had their tracking numbers.
[83] Regarding the first factor, and the following overlaps of course with whether the Crown has ultimately proven the guilt of Annih to the high requisite criminal standard, this is more than just a compelling case for the Crown. Despite the very able presentation and submissions of Mr. White, it is a truly overwhelming one.
[84] It is true that some of the circumstantial evidence is capable of supporting an inference that Annih was involved in the importation of something other than illegal contraband. As just one example, his mere possession, in his car and on his person, of the mailbox keys, the Envoy business card, the piece of paper with the handwritten store addresses on it and the GPS unit with the addresses that were loaded into it is not necessarily inconsistent with him picking up legal items.
[85] But the manner in which he came into possession of those things, except for the GPS unit, is only capable of one rational inference – that is that he knowingly agreed to receive something illegal, which something we know to be heroin. The encounter between Annih and the lady in the parking lot speaks for itself.
[86] In addition, the handwriting on the Envoy business card points to just one reasonable inference – that is that Annih knowingly attended upon a mailbox that was associated with other persons, “Greg Kaye” and “Sharon Kaye”. Why would a scheme be set up like that but for the retrieval of something illegal?
[87] Further, the knives, blades, scissors and latex gloves found inside Annih’s Nissan point, rationally, to his preparation for opening something illegal. If they were there simply for work purposes, why is the most important thing for his work, the trucking log book, absent? That is the one thing that he absolutely must have with him when he gets to work. That he would leave that most important item at home, which is what he testified to, makes no sense. That defeats entirely the whole point of having the work-related stuff in his Nissan.
[88] Also, the entire plan to pick up shipments at two different stores (not even two outlets of the same company) in two different cities, both some driving distance away from where Annih lived at the time, points, rationally, to an illegal operation. Nobody, on either end of the shipments, creates such a cumbersome scheme otherwise.
[89] In addition, the appearance of Annih on the UPS video clips points to an effort to look different. And that suggests, rationally, that he knowingly attended at the shop to retrieve illegal contraband. Frankly, on the videos alone, no trier would be able to confidently identify Annih as the man inside the store. He appears much heavier than he does in the photographs found on his cellular telephone and included in Exhibit 5, tab A. He is dressed markedly different. He has a baseball-style cap on. But for being told so, I never would have known that the person in the video clips was the same man in the photographs and in the Courtroom. The common sense conclusion is that Annih was deliberating trying to look different when he went to the UPS store.
[90] Also, that Annih chose to park his Nissan some distance away from both Envoy and UPS, rather than in available spots right in front of the stores themselves, points, rationally, to attempted concealment.
[91] Further, the call log between Annih and Obiora, Exhibit 9, is consistent with only one rational conclusion – that is that they were discussing something illegal. Seven telephone calls in just over three weeks. Not one conversation that lasted more than about 4.5 minutes. Five of the calls lasting less than one minute. And for kids’ Christmas presents? No, I say.
[92] In addition, the cryptic nature of the electronic communications between Annih and Obiora points to just one reasonable inference – that is that they were scheming something illegal. A message from Obiora to Annih that says nothing except a series of letters and numbers. A message from Obiora to Annih that says nothing except “Doris beacroft” and her address. These are not the types of messages that senders and receivers of Christmas presents exchange.
[93] Illegal drug importation depends on concealment. Secrecy. Clandestine activity. Gray’s evidence supports that, but so does basic common sense dictate that. There was plenty of that here.
[94] Also, we have the sudden exit of Annih from the UPS store immediately after the police car pulls up to the front door on November 7th. One has to be very cautious about what we used to refer to as consciousness of guilt evidence. It can be misleading. Here, however, I have watched the video clip multiple times. There is absolutely no question that Annih only starts to move to the door and exit the store after the police car is clearly visible through the glass frontage. This after waiting patiently for many minutes. I have no doubt that Annih was trying to get out of there before the police officer had a chance to confront him. Nothing else makes any common sense when one watches the video. And why would Annih want to leave? Surely, the only answer is because he was knowingly there to retrieve something illegal.
[95] The above is a sampling of the sheer strength of the Crown’s case. Not any one of these circumstances points necessarily to Annih’s guilt. But the circumstantial evidence taken in its totality points to one and only one reasonable inference, namely, that Annih conspired with Obiora, and probably others, to import these three heroin shipments into Canada.
III. Conclusion
[96] On the totality of the evidence adduced at trial, I am sure that Annih conspired with at least one other person to import into Canada the three packages which contained heroin and which were intercepted by the authorities, and that Annih attempted to pick up parcels at Envoy and UPS that he thought contained heroin, with the intention of trafficking in that heroin.
[97] As such, I find Annih guilty on all three counts.
Conlan J.
Released: September 28, 2018