OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,199
- 6,665
If the cops at the time couldn't get the one witness to identify the driver of the truck then the Crown wasted resources bringing the charge to trial.
What I don't understand is why he wasn't charged with leaving the scene of an accident. That we know he did.
I would think the Tim Horton's franchise owner would sue him for the damages to the building - pocket change for O'Reilly.
Probably was defended by the lawyer saying that if the witness couldn't identify ROR as the driver, how can they prove ROR was in the truck...