Break and enter trial adjourned

A P.E.I. man who the police say left a fingerprint on a plate at the crime scene will be back in court next month to hear a judge’s verdict.

Louis Paul Moore, 48, appeared before Chief Judge Nancy Orr in provincial court in Charlottetown Friday for the end of a trial on charges of break and enter, and mischief.

During the victim’s testimony earlier in the trial that lasted several days, she told the court she came home on May 6, 2019 to find a door open, a screen cut and her barbecue knocked over.

The victim testified her barbecue was broken and a TV that was mounted to a wall inside the house was gone, as was a microwave, a pair of sneakers and two propane tanks.

She told the court she knew Moore because he used to work with her ex-boyfriend and had been in her home in Pownal before.

He hadn’t been there since the break-up, she said

The victim also testified Moore sent her sexually inappropriate messages through Facebook after the break-up with her ex, leading her to block him.

Several other Crown witnesses testified, including two RCMP officers who are fingerprint experts and analyzed a print found on a plate inside the victim’s home.

The victim said she normally left the plate on top of her microwave, used it every day and regularly washed it.

Both expert witnesses analyzed the print from the crime scene and determined it was a match to Moore.

Moore didn’t testify during the trial and the defence didn’t call any evidence.

In her submissions Friday, Crown attorney Lisa Goulden said the evidence in the case was extremely strong and “quite persuasive.”

Goulden said the Crown established beyond a reasonable doubt that Moore left the print on the plate, which put him in the house at the time of the break and enter.

Defence lawyer Justin Milne said there was reasonable doubt raised about Moore’s guilt, arguing there were several issues related to the fingerprint evidence.

That included not knowing the error rate for fingerprint analysis, which he said made it hard to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the print was Moore’s.

Goulden rebutted Milne’s submissions and said the error rate the court should be concerned with is that of the two officers who determined the fingerprint at the scene was a match.

No errors were identified in their past work, Goulden said.

Moore will be back in court Nov. 13 for Orr to give her decision.