The accused was charged with robbery and wearing a disguise in connection with an alleged robbery on October 28, 2016.
The Crown's case relied on hearsay evidence: a 911 call and a videotaped statement from a witness who claimed complete amnesia at trial.
The court excluded both pieces of hearsay evidence, finding that the 911 call did not satisfy the res gestae exception and that the witness's statement failed to meet the threshold reliability requirements under the principled exception to the hearsay rule as refined in R. v. Bradshaw.
The court found the witness's testimony at trial was not credible and that the corroborative evidence from other witnesses was tainted and unreliable.
