R. v. Kang

R. v. Kang

On the totality of the circumstantial evidence (placement of heavy chains interfering with unloading, disturbed pallets with cocaine, yellow banding in the cab tying the accused to re-securing pallets, improbability of successful unloading at Pacific Produce, timing of pickups), the only rational inference is that the accused knew the trailer contained a substantial quantity of cocaine; Crown met its burden beyond a reasonable doubt.

Citation
2009 BCSC 1826
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Ajmer Singh Kang
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)
Outcome
Convicted on counts of importing cocaine contrary to s.6(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and possession for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s.5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.
Legal Topics
Knowledge, Circumstantial Evidence, Border Search, Expert Opinion, Credibility, Possession for Trafficking, Importation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Controlled Drugs and Substances Act Drug Importation Drug Trafficking Evidence Knowledge Circumstantial Evidence Border Search +4 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Ajmer Singh Kang

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Judgment (oral Reasons)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Crown proved the accused had knowledge of cocaine in trailer beyond a reasonable doubt
  2. 2 Whether a 'blind courier' scheme was practicable (weight of expert opinion)
  3. 3 Whether cocaine could have been unloaded at destination without driver complicity

Ratio Decidendi

On the totality of the circumstantial evidence (placement of heavy chains interfering with unloading, disturbed pallets with cocaine, yellow banding in the cab tying the accused to re-securing pallets, improbability of successful unloading at Pacific Produce, timing of pickups), the only rational inference is that the accused knew the trailer contained a substantial quantity of cocaine; Crown met its burden beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Convicted on counts of importing cocaine contrary to s.6(1) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and possession for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s.5(2) of the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act.

Orders

  • Conviction entered for importing cocaine contrary to s.6(1), Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c.19.
  • Conviction entered for possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking contrary to s.5(2), Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, S.C. 1996, c.19.