Defence lawyer David Tarnow renewed his suspicions of how RCMP officers handled the investigation leading to charges against his client, Christopher Cornell.

In his closing arguments this morning to the nine women and five men of the Yukon Supreme Court jury, Tarnow suggested critical evidence was planted or manipulated by the RCMP, after one of their own was shot at.

Some officers who took the stand were less than forthwright in their testimony because it would favour Cornell, he said.

Tarnow was at times animated in his submissions over the one hour and 20 minutes he took to deliver his arguments, slapping the podium to emphasize a point, shaking a bag holding a bullet that was supposedly found on Cornell's pocket.

Cornell, he said, told his story even though he didn't have to take the stand.

The 31-year-old Whitehorse man, who does not have a lot of education, held up well in cross-examination, he told the jury.

"You should acquit Mr. Cornell, you should him find him not guilty because he told you the truth.”

The case for the prosecution, he insisted, leaves the jurors with reasonable doubt.

Cornell is charged with attempting to murder Haines Junction RCMP Cpl. Kim MacKellar and Shane Oakley by shooting at MacKellar's RCMP crew cab during a high-speed chase along the Alaska Highway in the early morning of Sept. 26, 2011.

He is also charged with using violence and bear spray to rob Madley's General Store in Haines Junction the same morning.

Jessica Johnson, a 22-year-old Whitehorse woman, faces the same charges. Only Cornell is on trial at this time.

The jury has heard from more than 20 witnesses presented by Crown prosecutor Keith Parkkari since the trial began Sept. 9. Cornell took the stand last week, and was the only witness for the defence.

Parkkari was schedule to make his closing arguments this afternoon. The jury was scheduled to receive its final instructions from Justice Leigh Gower tomorrow morning before retiring to reach a verdict.

Cornell testified last week he was never at Madley's that morning, and was not in the black SUV MacKellar was chasing.

Custodian Frank Parent testified he was assaulted and sprayed with bear spray by two assailants he noticed inside Madley's store at about 6 a.m. while he was sweeping up before the store opened.

The jury heard how a black SUV sped away from Madley's when MacKellar and Oakley showed up in the police truck. The highway chase toward Destruction Bay ensued and ended 32 kilometres later when a bullet from a high-powered rifle exploded through the front windshield of the RCMP crew cab.

The defence lawyer emphasized the custodian didn't get a look at any faces, and neither did MacKellar or Oakley.

There is no evidence of Cornell's DNA or fingerprints found at Madley's, or any other scientific evidence that he was there.

Proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is the cornerstone of Canada's judicial system, Tarnow reminded the jury.

He said if they believe his client, the case is over. If they don't believe him, the burden is still on the Crown to prove his client was in Madley's and in the back of the black SUV shooting at MacKellar and Oakley, he said.

The defence lawyer emphasized the burden of proof is a heavy one.

The jurors must ask themselves if they are satisfied the Crown has proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, and they have to ask themselves if they would feel the same next week, or next year.

"If any of those questions are in the negative, then it is your duty to return a verdict of not guilty.”

Tarnow reminded the jury of how Cpl. MacKellar was the last Crown witness to testify, but MacKellar could not provide any evidence of who he saw at Madley's, who was in the truck he was chasing, and whether there was even a shot from the truck he was chasing.

MacKellar was called last not to provide evidence, but to distract the jury with emotion about how he was injured in the incident, so that the jury would forget about the job of examining the facts, the lawyer said.

"You must review all these things that I have been telling you about, not just the fact that MacKellar was hurt.”

Tarnow recalled the bullet found in Cornell's pocket at the Haines Junction RCMP detachment after he was moved from the arrest site near the Pine Lake Campground.

Officers searched Cornell thoroughly at the arrest site, but didn't remove the bullet from his pocket? he told the jury.

He reminded the jury how one officer said he felt a cylindrical object in the pocket of his jeans, though it might have been lip balm.

There was nothing in the officer's notes from that day about a cylindrical object in Cornell's pocket, he said.

"Of course there wasn't,” Tarnow said sternly, while slapping his podium solidly.

"Because it was not there,” he said, with another loud slap.

The only thing that makes sense, Tarnow told the jury, was that there never was a bullet in Cornell's pocket when he was arrested.

He said the firearms expert testified how the black SUV recovered from the ditch 12 kilometres beyond the site of where MacKellar's truck was shot did not have any evidence of gunshot damage.

It was only after he asked during cross-examination that the expert admitted she could not find any gunshot residue inside the black SUV either.

Tarnow suggested she didn't mention that while being questioned by the Crown prosecutor because she was partial toward the RCMP, her employer, and didn't want to provide anything that might favour his client.

The senior RCMP identification officer on the scene would have the jury believe he blew the test that would have shown whether there was gunshot residue on his clients hands, one way or the other, he reminded the jury.