Majority
English version of the judgment of the Court delivered orally by
Lamer C.J.
Lamer C.J. ‑‑ Despite your excellent presentation, Mr. Poulin, we are of the view that this appeal should be dismissed.
We essentially agree with the majority judges in the Court of Appeal.
There is no evidence of the presence of a retardant, other than speculation in this regard. This total lack of evidence makes the trial judge's conclusion that the accused had the exclusive opportunity to set the fire unreasonable, and this conclusion is necessary for a conviction having regard to the facts adduced in evidence in this case.
The appeal is dismissed.
Judgment accordingly.
Solicitors for the appellant: Claude Provost and Pierre Poulin, Montréal.
Solicitors for the respondent: Patenaude, Dubois, Longueuil.