On reading the charge straight through as it would have been heard by the jury and taking the judge's charge on self-defence and the supplementary instructions as a whole, I am of the opinion that the complex issues involved in the defence were not clearly communicated to the jury sufficiently to enable them to deliberate correctly on the possible verdicts open to them. In consequence, the jury reached the unreasonable and perverse verdict of acquittal. I am satisfied that the verdict would not necessarily have been the same if the trial judge had properly directed the jury: Vezéau v. R., 1976 CanLII 7 (SCC), [1977] 2 S.C.R. 277, 34 C.R.N.S. 309, 28 C.C.C. (2d) 81, 66 D.L.R. (3d) 418, 8 N.R. 235 [Que.]. In the result I consider there should be a new trial.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.