Trial on a charge of break and enter into a dwelling house. The only evidence identifying the accused was a partial right thumb print found on the lower right corner of a TV mounted on the living room wall. The fingerprint expert testified; however, the police officer who verified the expert’s conclusions was not called by the Crown.
The alleged verification evidence was inadmissible hearsay: Bornyk, 2013 BCSC 1927. Further, the fingerprint evidence (even if reliable) was insufficient to prove that the accused broke into the residence. As per Mars, 2006 CanLII 3460 (ONCA), the probative value of fingerprint evidence depends upon whether the entirety of the evidence reasonably permits the inference to be drawn that the accused touched the item in question in connection with the crime charged, as opposed to at some other time or place.
C. Ries – Defence Counsel