Sans autre élément, le fait qu'un accusé ait été la dernière personne vue avec la victime lorsque celle-ci a été vue vivante pour la dernière fois ne suffit pas à établir la culpabilité de l'accusé dans le cadre d'une accusation de meurtre

R. v. Boucher, 2022 ONCA 40

Lien vers la décision

[155]   The first has to do with the value of evidence that an accused was the last person seen with the deceased when the deceased was last seen alive in proving the accused’s guilt for killing the deceased.

[156]   Without more, evidence that an accused was the last person seen with the deceased when the deceased was last seen alive, is not sufficient to establish the accused’s guilt on a charge of murdering the deceased: R. v. Stevens (1984), 1984 CanLII 3481 (ON CA), 11 C.C.C. (3d) 518 (Ont. C.A.), at p. 534, leave to appeal refused, 15 W.C.B. 157. However, the probative value of this evidence varies with the circumstances in which the accused and deceased were last seen together. As for example, in a case of child murder where the accused and deceased child were last seen together in a motor vehicle of the deceased, who was a stranger to the child, a short distance from where the body of the child was found: Stevens, at p. 535. Evidence of the accused after-the-fact conduct may also be important in enhancing the cogency of the last living sighting evidence: Stevens, at p. 533.

[157]   The second has to do with a factor we may consider in assessing the merits of the appellant’s allegations of unreasonableness in the verdict rendered. We are entitled to consider the appellant’s failure to testify in the face of the circumstantial case arrayed against him, thus his failure to provide the basis for an alternative inference inconsistent with guilt: R. v. George-Nurse, 2018 ONCA 515, 362 C.C.C. (3d) 76, at para. 33, aff’d 2019 SCC 12.