Law360 Canada ( November 10, 2017, 11:50 AM EST) -- Appeal by Durham Regional Crime Stoppers Inc. (Crime Stoppers) and Corner from the decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice stating that informer privilege did not apply to the Crime Stoppers tip in the case of the 2014 shooting that resulted in the death of Niazi. Corner made a statement to the police indicating that three men were responsible for the shooting. Corner later became a suspect in the shooting and was placed under police surveillance. About a week after the shooting, Crime Stoppers received an anonymous tip from a witness that four men had waited near the crime scene before getting into a car and driving to a lake where they threw things into the water. The call was not recorded, but the information from the caller was given to the investigators at the Durham Regional Police Major Crime Unit. A few days after Crime Stoppers received the anonymous tip, Corner was charged with the second-degree murder of Niazi. The Crown brought a pre-trial application seeking to introduce evidence of the anonymous tip. The Crown maintained that the call was made by Corner to divert attention away from himself in the police investigation. It sought to use the call at trial as evidence relevant to Corner’s general credibility. Corner and Crime Stoppers submitted that the call was covered by informer privilege. The application judge found that Corner had made the call. It followed that informer privilege did not apply to the tip because its application would, in the circumstances, undermine the objectives underlying the privilege. Crime Stoppers and Corner appealed the ruling pursuant to s. 40(1) of the Supreme Court Act....