R. v. Baker

Parties

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault (s.271 Ccc) / Pre Trial Admissibility Hearing Under S.276(1) (application to Admit Prior Sexual History)

Legal Issues

1. 1 Whether proposed prior sexual activity evidence meets s.276(2) requirements (specific instances, relevance to an issue at trial, significant probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice)
2. 2 Whether the prior sexual activity evidence establishes an explicit link to the accused's defence of honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent
3. 3 Whether admission would risk twin-myth stereotypical reasoning and undue prejudice

Ratio Decidendi

The application to admit prior sexual-activity evidence was denied because, although the evidence was of specific instances, the applicant failed to establish an explicit, articulated link between that evidence and the specific issues of his defence (honest but mistaken belief in communicated consent); consequently the evidence lacked the required significant probative value and posed a real risk of twin-myth reasoning and undue prejudice under s.276(2) and the factors in s.276(3), as guided by R. v. Barton and R. v. Goldfinch.

Court Disposition

Application to admit prior sexual activity evidence denied.

Orders

• Application under s.276(1) to adduce prior sexual activity evidence is denied.