Ontario Criminal


Judge made distinction between finding of fabrication and mere disbelief of statement

Accused convicted of murder for shooting driver of truck in hijacking. Accused being commercial truck driver, body of circumstantial evidence tracing movements of accused, deceased suggesting accused was killer. Accused giving exculpatory statement denying any role in homicide. Trial judge instructing jurors on difference between disbelief of accused’s statement, finding it was fabricated. Defence counsel not objecting to charge. Accused’s appeal from conviction dismissed. Trial judge did not err in instructions to jury on use of accused’s exculpatory statement. Judge made clear important distinction between finding of fabrication, and mere disbelief of statement. Circumstances in which statement was made would have given jurors basis to make finding of fabrication.

R. v. Cyr (Dec. 27, 2012, Ont. C.A., Watt, Weiler and Epstein JJ.A., File No. CA C51817) 104 W.C.B. (2d) 1033.

cover image


Subscribers get early and easy access to Law Times.

Law Times Poll

A recent Court of Appeal decision found the effects of internet defamation distinguishes it from defamation in other mediums, when it comes to awarding damages. Do you agree with this finding?