-6-
53
R. v. Turkington 22 C.A.R. p.91 - "If that alter-
nasive theory was possible & consistent with the evidence,
the appellant was entitled to be acquitted."
Submit that applies to this case.
R. v. Bookbinder 23 C.A.R.
R. V. Guerin 23 C.A.R.
been asked to guess.
2. Y. Br o wn 22 C.A.R.
p.60
40.
Suggest the Jury has
140.
Ground No. 2. St. re K. Fine's evidence bridged the
gap in Crom case & notwithstanding
warning Jury could
not get it out of their minds. Admit that C. J. had
discretion in discharging Jury but submit he ought to
have exercised it in discharging Jury & ordering new trial.
Kot a question as to whether Appellant is guilty or
-
not guilty main question whether he had a fair trial &
whether Jury might have given a different verdict had they
not heard what had been disclosed to them in opening. Not
a question whether Jury "must" have returned different
verdict but whether they "might" have done so.
Last ground of appeal re evidence of rs. Fairburn
No objection could have been raised as when Mrs. F. gave
evidence we did not know that M.F. would not give evidence.
Krs. F's evidence not admissible until Crow had put
forward a prima facie case as it falls under head of
similar acts. #
R. V.
p.237.
Smith 11 C.A.R. p.229 refers to Judgment on
J. J. H.
COURT ADJCURNED TO 2.15 P.M.
9/10/34
2.15 F.M.
Same Counsel & Solrs. (Appellant not present).
Mr. Fraser opens for Crown.
Shall deal with points of law Nos. 1 & 3 of (2), shall
afterwards deal with No.2 & then with No.1 of the amended
notice of appeal on ground of law.
Refers to 5th Ed. of