The accused was charged with multiple offences arising from a violent home invasion robbery where the victim was beaten, tied up, and had his pants and underwear removed.
The Crown's case relied on circumstantial evidence, including DNA found on a bandage at the scene, surveillance video, and items seized from the accused's residence that matched those used in the robbery.
The accused and a defence witness testified that the witness committed the robbery using items borrowed from the accused, but the court rejected this evidence as not credible.
Applying the W.(D.) framework and circumstantial evidence principles, the court found the accused guilty of the home invasion offences.