R. v. Meldrum
The Crown failed to prove the accused's identity as the assailant beyond a reasonable doubt because the primary identification evidence was unreliable: the complainant had been intoxicated and in a blackout, the witness's in‑court identification lacked prior identification procedures and corroboration, and there was no physical evidence linking the accused to the stabbing; accordingly the accused was acquitted on all counts.
- Citation
- 2025 BCSC 1087
- Parties
- Crown: Rex; Accused: Tyler Sampson Meldrum
- Court
- Supreme Court of British Columbia
- Jurisdiction
- Canada
- Judgment Date
- 29 May 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal / Trial (oral Reasons for Judgment)
- Outcome
- Accused found not guilty on all counts (acquittal).
- Legal Topics
- Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Assault With a Weapon, Breach of Probation by Possession of a Weapon, Eyewitness Identification, Witness Credibility and Reliability
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Crown
Tyler Sampson Meldrum
Accused
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial (oral Reasons for Judgment)
Legal Issues
- 1 Identity of the assailant
- 2 Reliability and credibility of eyewitnesses given intoxication
- 3 Whether Crown proved offences beyond a reasonable doubt
Ratio Decidendi
The Crown failed to prove the accused's identity as the assailant beyond a reasonable doubt because the primary identification evidence was unreliable: the complainant had been intoxicated and in a blackout, the witness's in‑court identification lacked prior identification procedures and corroboration, and there was no physical evidence linking the accused to the stabbing; accordingly the accused was acquitted on all counts.
Court Disposition
Accused found not guilty on all counts (acquittal).
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment