Ambrose v. The Queen

Was the Court of Appeal for the Province of New Brunswick wrong in holding that:

(a) Notwithstanding the finding of prejudicial errors on the part of the trial Judge, no reasonable jury properly charged could have come to any other conclusion than the guilt of the accused?; and

(b) In finding there was no substantial wrong or miscarriage of justice?

Did the Court of Appeal for the Province of New Brunswick also err in finding that:

(a) The trial Judge was right in his instructions to the jury as to reasonable doubt regarding the victims acting in the course of duty; and

(b) In holding that the jury in finding capital murder was correct?

The Appellants respectfully submit that the Court of Appeal for the Province of New Brunswick erred in findings under both points 1 and 2.

[Page 723]

At the commencement of the argument, counsel for the appellants expressly withdrew the point outlined in para. 2(a) above.

In his very carefully considered reasons, Limerick J.A. dealt with the trial and with the judge’s charge and then summarized his conclusions as follows:

In summation the trial Judge made certain errors during the trial, specifically:

1. In failing to reprimand Crown Counsel for his use of the word “fiction” and not instructing the jury to disregard it.

2. In not more fully specifying the evidence which was admissible against one accused and not against the other.

In stating as facts certain conclusions he arrived at which were not supported by evidence, particularly, the reference to an illegal drug bill.

In not more fully enumerating the discrepancies and gaps in the Crown’s case.

In admitting evidence of an intended kidnapping of J.D. Irving by Hutchison, and also in admitting evidence of a statement by Hutchison to James Nelligan that the former had been involved in an armed robbery in Ontario and had asked his accomplice to kill a policeman.