Law360 Canada ( October 1, 2026, 9:44 AM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant from his convictions for first-degree murder of his mother and stepfather (collectively, victims). The victims were asleep when fuel poured near their bed was ignited. The appellant’s mother died in the home and his stepfather escaped but died later that day. Before his death, the stepfather made statements identifying “Rich,” “Rick” or his “son-in-law” as responsible and referred to financial problems. The appellant made statements to police on July 9 and 10, 2018, denying involvement and claiming that a knee injury prevented him from walking down stairs or driving. He later admitted having lied about the extent of his injury. The appellant argued that he was psychologically detained during the July interviews and his rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) were breached, that his stepfather’s dying declarations were unreliable or the jury was inadequately instructed concerning them, and that the trial judge erred in admitting and instructing the jury on his statements about his knee injury as fabricated statements and post-offence conduct. The Crown maintained that the appellant voluntarily participated in the police interactions, the dying declarations satisfied established hearsay exceptions, and there was independent evidence capable of supporting an inference that the appellant fabricated his statements about his injury....