Defence in Robert Vernon Case Alleges Worst Lost-Evidence Scandal in Canadian History, Exposing Systemic Investigative Failures Within Toronto Police Service

Toronto, Ontario —
The defence team for Robert Vernon, who has been incarcerated since April 2, 2022, on an attempted murder charge, has formally asserted before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice that this prosecution represents one of the most egregious lost-evidence and investigative negligence cases in Canadian history.

The case is currently under intense judicial scrutiny by a pre-eminent defence team led by senior counsel Megan Savard, following revelations that core evidence was withheld, witnesses were discouraged from cooperating, surveillance material was ignored or corrupted, and investigative records were allegedly falsified by members of the Toronto Police Service.

A False Narrative Built on Tunnel Vision and Racial Profiling

Contrary to the narrative publicly advanced by Toronto Police, the defence maintains that Mr. Vernon was not the aggressor but the victim of an ambush during a botched robbery in the Lawrence Heights community—commonly known as “Jungle.” Despite this, police investigators allegedly constructed a false media narrative of a random attack, rooted in systemic tunnel vision, groupthink, and racially-biased propensity reasoning applied to an Afro-Caribbean defendant.

From the outset, the investigation relied almost exclusively on the initial statement of a single complainant, despite the existence of contradictory video evidence and multiple independent eyewitnesses. That complainant has since shifted his narrative repeatedly, raising serious credibility concerns.

Witness Suppression in a High-Risk Community

The Lawrence Heights area is widely known for its history of gun violence and a deeply entrenched code of silence—a reality that demands more, not less, investigative diligence. Yet evidence before the Court shows that Toronto Police officers from 32 Division actively discouraged witnesses from providing statements, even when those witnesses were willing and forthcoming.

• A TTC bus driver, who stopped his vehicle adjacent to the alleged offence and witnessed key events, was told by an investigating officer that he did not need to provide a statement.

• The officer further stated—on body-worn camera footage—that if the driver declined, he would simply be noted as “uncooperative.”

• Firefighters and EMS personnel separately identified additional eyewitnesses, yet investigators failed to interview them entirely.

This conduct resulted in the complete absence of neutral eyewitness testimony at trial, reducing the case to a credibility contest between the complainant and the accused—an outcome directly attributable to police inaction.

Withheld and Corrupted Video Evidence

Despite conducting a CCTV canvas, investigators failed to review or preserve critical surveillance footage:

• A TTC bus video containing material contradictions to the complainant’s account was never disclosed, despite its existence.

• This footage was not introduced at the first trial, which ended in a mistrial on March 25, 2024.

• Only after a new defence team was retained did counsel independently obtain the TTC footage—along with multiple surveillance videos police claimed did not exist.

The only direct evidence relied upon by police was a poor-quality civilian dash-cam clip, submitted one day after the incident. Investigators never interviewed the dash-cam owner, nor disclosed that the video had been edited prior to submission—a fact revealed only through defence cross-examination at trial.

Allegations of Document Forgery and Evidence Fabrication

The defence further alleges that:

• The lead investigator failed to review surveillance footage for months, allowing retention periods to expire and videos to become corrupted.

• To avoid scrutiny, documents and disclosure responses were allegedly falsified to assert that probative evidence did not exist.

• Records were fabricated to suggest witnesses had been interviewed when they had not.

Additionally, a recently retired Toronto Police Sergeant filed a declaration claiming no involvement and no notes, despite:

• Body-worn camera footage showing him actively taking notes at the scene

• Police record-generation confirming his attendance

• Other officers corroborating his involvement

Multiple officers also failed to produce notes, or submitted vague and obscured documentation, further undermining the integrity of disclosure.

Systemic Failure, Not Isolated Error

More than 50 nearby locations and businesses were never canvassed, forensic investigation was minimal, and collected videos were spliced to omit contradictory content. Collectively, these failures reflect systemic malpractice, not oversight.

The defence asserts that the prosecution continues not on evidentiary strength, but due to the vulnerability of a marginalized defendant who has remained in custody for nearly three years.

Call for Public Accountability and Institutional Review

The defence team and the Vernon family are calling for:

• An independent public inquiry into the investigative conduct of Toronto Police in this case

• A comprehensive internal review of TPS evidence-handling, disclosure, and witness-management practices

• Oversight from civil-rights organizations and elected officials, including the Mayor of Toronto

At stake is not only the liberty of one man, but public trust in the criminal justice system, particularly within marginalized communities already burdened by violence and systemic neglect.

Media Contact:
Available upon request

Background materials, court filings, and supporting documentation can be provided to accredited media and civil-rights organizations.