Accused robber Leo Burgess was freed from custody yesterday after he was cleared of charges of aggravated burglary and possessing a firearm.The 17-year-old was found not guilty by a majority verdict of nine to three on both charges.He had been accused of being the ringleader of a December 6, 2010 robbery, in which a former jeweller was held at gunpoint by four men, two wielding firearms, inside his Southampton home.During the trial, the jury had heard testimony from victim Gregory Wilson, who said he was at home alone when he heard noises in his son’s bedroom.When he went to investigate, he found three men in his son’s room with a third climbing through the window.The four later escaped with around $65,000 of jewellery, much of which was made by the victim, and a sum of cash. None of the items have been recovered.Crown counsel Nicole Smith argued that Mr Burgess was the leader of the group, both wielding a gun and giving the others orders.She noted that Mr Wilson had on the stand described the ring leader as light skinned and light voiced, wearing a red bandanna around his face an latex gloves on his hands.She said that not only did Mr Burgess match that descriptions, but that both latex gloves and a red bandanna were found by the police near the scene with Mr Burgess’ DNA.Defence attorney Shade Subair however said the DNA proved her client owned the items, not that he wore the items on that day or robbed Mr Wilson.On the stand, Mr Burgess said that two days before the robbery, he had used a pair of latex gloves to clean a muddy pair of football boots, and left them outside in a bag along with a bandanna and football pads.The day after the incident, he said he noticed the bag was missing.Both he and his mother, Cindy Burgess, told the court that he was at home sick on the day of the robbery, watching DVDs, but Ms Smith argued that Ms Burgess was lying to protect her son.Ms Subair said Mr Burgess was the victim of a incomplete police investigation, with officers failing to follow leads such as names put forward as possible culprits by the defendant during a police investigation.And while she agreed that Mr Burgess lied on the stand about his relationship with the victim’s son, she said he was nervous at the time and trying to distance himself because of rumours the son’s friends had committed the burglary.Regarding the description of the culprit by the victim, she said the description had changed dramatically after her client had been arrested, and that the victim had not identified Mr Burgess as the robber in an identification parade.Puisne Judge Carlisle Greaves yesterday morning summarised the evidence in the case and instructed the jury before leaving them to deliberate on the matter.While unable to reach a unanimous verdict, the jury returned at around 4.30pm with a majority verdict of not guilty on both charges.Leaving court, an emotional Mr Burgess hugged crying family members, celebrating his freedom.