A trial judge's directions on self-defence need not address self-defence with respect to a particular count where there is no evidentiary basis for the defence on that count, even where self-defence is raised generally at trial. Directions containing errors, including misstatements as to the onus of proof, may be adequate when read as a whole if the correct directions are given elsewhere and the errors are incomprehensible rather than misleading. The acquittal of a co-accused charged as a party to a joint criminal enterprise does not necessarily render the principal's conviction inconsistent where the differing verdicts are explicable on the basis that the Crown failed to establish the co-accused's role as aider and abettor.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.