Where the Crown alleges a single continuing conspiracy and leaves to the jury an alternative basis that the accused joined the conspiracy at a later date with knowledge of prior events, this does not constitute latent duplicity or a separate conspiracy requiring a separate count. The case also illustrates that telephone intercept evidence and admissions can cure deficiencies in identification evidence to sustain a conspiracy conviction.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 2 later cases that cite this judgment.
1 of the 2 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.