Circumstantial Evidence (Case Digests): Difference between revisions
Created page with "<!-- *R v Frank, [http://canlii.ca/t/fpbqh 2011 BCSC 1716] (CanLII) -- circumstantial case -- single fingerprint on duct tape used to bind victims -- guilty * R v Grant, [http..." |
No edit summary |
||
| (10 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!-- | <!-- | ||
* | * {{CanLIIRx|Frank|fpbqh|2011 BCSC 1716 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC|Powers J}} -- circumstantial case -- single fingerprint on duct tape used to bind victims -- guilty | ||
* | * {{CanLIIRx|Grant|1pzxw|2006 ABPC 306 (CanLII)}}{{perABPC|Allen J}} | ||
* | * {{CanLIIRx|SWM|1m1b0|2005 BCSC 1601 (CanLII)}}{{perBCSC|Ehrcke J}} -- conviction -- father was last person with child before discovery of injuries, coupled with evidence of past bad acts | ||
* Tsigaridas | * {{CanLIIRP|Tsigaridas|6k70|1994 CanLII 1289 (ON CA)|[1994] OJ No 1999 (Ont C.A.)}}{{fix}} -- acquittal -- evidence showing that keys to restaurant were shared with employees negates exclusive opportunity of owner to burn down business | ||
* | * {{CanLIIR-N|Keller|(1970) 1 CCC (2d) 203}} -- convicted -- fingerprint on matchbook found at scene sufficient to connect accused with break and enter. | ||
--> | --> | ||