R. v. Squires

Iacobucci J. — This is an appeal as of right. The major issue on appeal is the adequacy of the trial judge’s charge to the jury on reasonable doubt. On this issue, we agree, substantially for the reasons of O’Neill J.A., dissenting in the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal ((2002), 209 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 99), that the trial judge, who had the benefit of the Court’s reasons in R. v. Lifchus, [1997] 3 S.C.R. 320, erred in his charge to the jury. We agree with O’Neill J.A. that the charge, when read as a whole, gives rise to a reasonable likelihood that the jury misapprehended the correct standard of proof.

Since the matter is going back for a new trial, it is not necessary to deal with R. v. W. (D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742, and post‑offence conduct issues. Accordingly, we would allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal, and order a new trial.