I consider Nadeau v. R. (1984), 1984 CanLII 28 (SCC), 15 C.C.C. (3d) 499 (S.C.C.) as authority for the proposition that if a fact has not been established against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to the most favourable interpretation to him. The accused benefits from any reasonable doubt at the outset. The trier of fact should not choose between two conflicting versions.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.