Accused was charged with break, enter and theft of store which had glass pane broken and drops of blood outside of it. Blood was determined to be accused with minimal percentage chance it could belong to his fraternal twin brother. Twin brother testified who was significantly larger than accused and claimed to be driving in different area at time of offence. Accused guilty. Court found no rational or logical connection for blood of accused to be at store as there was no evidence that blood was there earlier. Court noted accused was not required to testify but found blood rationally and logically linked to unlawful entry and theft.
R. v. Marini (Jun. 21, 2013, Ont. S.C.J., W.L. Whalen J., File No. Sault Ste. Marie C57413) 108 W.C.B. (2d) 750.