R. v. B.R.J.

R. v. B.R.J.

The court admitted the co-accused S.S.’s videotaped statement because necessity was established by S.S.’s effective refusal to remember at trial and threshold reliability was satisfied on a balance of probabilities due to immediacy, consistency with known facts, coherent demeanour during interview, police procedure followed and absence of impairment or coercion; probative value was not outweighed by prejudice.

Citation
2012 NSPC 32
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty The Queen; Accused: B.R.J.
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal (youth Justice) / Voir Dire on Admissibility During Trial
Outcome
Admitted
Legal Topics
Hearsay, Admissibility of Co Accused Statements, Necessity, Reliability, Vetrovec Warning, Voluntariness
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Youth Justice Hearsay Admissibility of Co Accused Statements Necessity Reliability Vetrovec Warning +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 8 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty The Queen

Crown

B.R.J.

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (youth Justice) / Voir Dire on Admissibility During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a co-accused’s out-of-court statement is admissible for the truth of its contents
  2. 2 Whether necessity is established given the witness’s claimed memory loss
  3. 3 Whether the statement meets threshold reliability under the principled approach

Ratio Decidendi

The court admitted the co-accused S.S.’s videotaped statement because necessity was established by S.S.’s effective refusal to remember at trial and threshold reliability was satisfied on a balance of probabilities due to immediacy, consistency with known facts, coherent demeanour during interview, police procedure followed and absence of impairment or coercion; probative value was not outweighed by prejudice.

Court Disposition

Admitted

Orders

  • Admit S.S.'s videotaped September 20, 2011 statement to Cst. John Beer into evidence for the truth of its contents; statement to be considered with all other evidence at trial in determining whether Crown has proven charges beyond a reasonable doubt