My interpretation is that he provided enough evidence to the RCMP that convinced them to stay the case, since they likely thought the evidence they had to convict Barker was weak. This lead to him not having a chance in court to clear his name.

Had he not spoken to the police at all, and instead waited to present his evidence in court, he likely would have been found not guilty and therefore would have cleared his name.

Him talking to police worsened the situation because they are not the ones who evaluate the evidence and make a conviction decision (judges/juries do that). The job of the police is to collect evidence, and Barker did that for them (to his detriment).

So much just-world-fallacy-inspired victim blaming in this thread. The problem here is actually better described as a breakdown in communication with the police, on the part of the RCMP. (I wonder if they have their own videos like "Don't listen to your victims" and "Shut your eyes Mondays" ?)

Modulo the third party scammer that created the situation, the bad actor here is the RCMP itself for bringing the weight of the government down on this guy without doing the real work of actually investigating. The true reform would be to destroy this regressive idea whereby government agents/systems can attack people and then just walk away from the matter after realizing they are wrong. If there were statutory reimbursements for hiring legal representation, time spent/detained, emotional distress etc, then the victim here would have the resources to continue the matter in the eventually consistent justice system. Instead the official policy would seem to be something like "Thank you for your involuntary contribution to this rookie agent's training. Better luck next time"

Being out of town in Halifax for the following 3 days probably made the officer a lot less convinced of innocence right off the bat. That's why he showed up at the house the next day.