Law360 Canada ( January 20, 2026, 9:35 AM EST) -- Appeal by Demetroff from his conviction for first-degree murder in the shooting death of Parker. The appellant and co-accused Saddleback were tried together before a judge and jury. The Crown conceded it could not prove the murder was planned and deliberate but argued first-degree murder, asserting Parker was killed while being forcibly confined in his SUV. The Crown submitted that the appellant was either the principal shooter, aided Saddleback by giving her the gun, or entered into a common intention to forcibly confine and rob Parker, knowing murder was a probable consequence. The appellant’s police statement, in which he initially denied involvement but later admitted to directing Parker to drive outside Wetaskiwin and firing a shot at the SUV, was central to the Crown’s case. Saddleback’s statement contradicted the appellant’s, asserting he was the shooter. Neither accused testified. The appellant challenged the trial judge’s instructions to the jury, arguing errors in failing to apply the R v W(D) (W(D)) framework to his police statement, improperly admitting and instructing on past discreditable conduct, failing to properly instruct on after-the-fact conduct, and providing conclusory directions on key factual issues. He submitted the jury should have been told it could not rely on disbelief of his exculpatory evidence. He sought to have the verdict overturned and a new trial ordered....