Law360 Canada ( September 19, 2025, 3:43 PM EDT) -- Appeal by Ramdeo from convictions for kidnapping, use of an imitation firearm to commit an assault and possession of an imitation firearm for a purpose dangerous to the public peace. Kidnappers abducted and beat the complainant before he ultimately escaped from the trunk of the rental car used by the kidnappers. Following the complainant’s escape, the car was returned to the car rental company outside of regular business hours. Ramdeo, also known as Rocky, was arrested that same day. The central witness for the Crown was the complainant who had a significant criminal record for crimes of dishonesty. He testified that at some point during the kidnapping, he saw Rocky who he met several times before. The trial judge accepted the complainant’s evidence in part and found that his evidence of the kidnapping and Ramdeo’s involvement was confirmed by external evidence. Ramdeo denied any involvement in the abduction. He acknowledged renting the car but insisted he did not know why the car was needed. Following a judge-alone trial, Ramdeo was found guilty on all charges. Ramdeo argued the trial judge erred by allowing the complainant, a Vetrovec witness, to corroborate himself, by failing to apply the standard set out in R. v. W(D) and by misapprehending the evidence and subjecting it to uneven scrutiny....