If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!TwitterFacebookGoogle+LinkedinTumblremail
The Residual Exception to Hearsay Rule and the Use of Corroborative Evidence
This capsule explores the manner in which corroborative evidence can be used to render hearsay evidence “reliable” and hence admissible under the residual exception the rule. In particular, it assesses the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in R v Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35. If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!TwitterFacebookGoogle+LinkedinTumblremail
R vs Hart: New Test for Probative Value
In this video blog, I explore the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in R v Hart, 2014 SCC 52, which addressed the admissibility of confessions made while the accused was being investigated by use of a “Mr Big” operation. My interest here is not so much in these operations per se, but what the Court’s decision tells us about how …
R vs Boone: The Use of Prior Sexual History Evidence
In this Video Blog, I concentrate on the Ontario Court of Appeal’s use of s. 276 of the Code – to exclude certain prior sexual history evidence. I go on to comment about the utility of section 276, especially given the Court’s decision that the evidence lacked probative value. You might think I’d say, “well what’s the point of s. …
Ghomeshi Trial: Communication Between Witnesses
In this video blog, I take a look at the ongoing Ghomeshi trial and assess the meaning of cross-examination that took place with the third complainant. One subject of that cross was the fact that she had exchanged at least 5000 messages with another complainant. What is the meaning of this? How does it affect the Crown’s case? I explore …
Privilege & State of Mind Waiver
In this video blog, I explore some common issues that arise when a party tries to rely on legal advice privilege, and the opposing party suggests that privilege was waived when the client’s “state of mind” came in issue. Several recent cases have done a good job of clearing up this doctrine, and I look at it in detail. If …
Burden of Tendering Admissions When Identity is Disputed
Tendering admissions made by the defendant in a criminal case is easy – except when there is reason to dispute whether it was the defendant who actually made the statement. Then things can get complicated in a hurry. This Video Blog attempts to sift through some contradictory jurisprudence and provide a framework for admitting statements in these situations. If you …