Jury finding accused guilty of multiple offences arising from home invasion where elderly couple beat with baton. Crown’s case resting on DNA evidence on two bandanas recovered from scene. DNA expert agreeing could not say when accused’s DNA was placed on bandanas and agreed person wearing them during robbery may not have deposited DNA on them. Police seizing baton similar to that used in robbery from accused two months later. Victim testifying as to differences in detail from weapon used in attack. Accused’s conviction appeal dismissed. Jury’s verdicts not unreasonable. DNA evidence could not support conviction without further evidence of similar baton. DNA expert’s evidence could not include accused as perpetrator of robbery. Jury could conclude victim’s inaccurate description of details arose from circumstances in which he observed baton. Appropriate to take accused’s failure to testify into account in holding verdicts reasonable.
R. v. Wills (Mar. 7, 2014, Ont. C.A., Doherty J.A., S.E. Pepall J.A., and M.L. Benotto J.A., File No.
CA C54968) 112 W.C.B. (2d) 2.