R. v. Jobe

R. v. Jobe

The trial judge concluded the Crown did not prove on a balance of probabilities that the videotaped September 13, 2015 statement was threshold-reliable: the declarant's motive to minimize and protect an accused, the likelihood that substantive content was elicited by police prompting and adoption of another accused's statement (previously ruled involuntary), the recantation and uselessness of in-court testimony, and lack of sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness led to exclusion of the statement for the truth of its contents.

Citation
2016 NSSC 275
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: M'Bai Babou Jobe; Accused: Jordan Matthew Joyce; Accused: Tyler Damian Kipper
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
17 October 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Trial Voir Dire on Admissibility of Prior Inconsistent Witness Statement (principled Exception to Hearsay)
Outcome
Crown's application to admit the videotaped September 13, 2015 statement for the truth of its contents denied; statement excluded for substantive use but receivable for impeachment.
Legal Topics
Hearsay, Principled Exception, Threshold Reliability, Prior Inconsistent Statement, Videotaped Statement, Youth Criminal Justice Act S.146, Motive to Lie
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Youth Justice Hearsay Principled Exception Threshold Reliability Prior Inconsistent Statement Videotaped Statement +2 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 5 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown/prosecution

M'Bai Babou Jobe

Accused

Jordan Matthew Joyce

Accused

Tyler Damian Kipper

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Trial Voir Dire on Admissibility of Prior Inconsistent Witness Statement (principled Exception to Hearsay)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the videotaped prior inconsistent statement of a recanting witness meets threshold reliability for admission under the principled exception to the hearsay rule
  2. 2 Application and effect of s.146 of the Youth Criminal Justice Act on admissibility of youth statements
  3. 3 Relevance of motive to lie and police elicitation in assessing threshold reliability

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge concluded the Crown did not prove on a balance of probabilities that the videotaped September 13, 2015 statement was threshold-reliable: the declarant's motive to minimize and protect an accused, the likelihood that substantive content was elicited by police prompting and adoption of another accused's statement (previously ruled involuntary), the recantation and uselessness of in-court testimony, and lack of sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness led to exclusion of the statement for the truth of its contents.

Court Disposition

Crown's application to admit the videotaped September 13, 2015 statement for the truth of its contents denied; statement excluded for substantive use but receivable for impeachment.

Orders

  • The videotaped September 13, 2015 statement of R.B. is NOT admitted for the truth of its contents.
  • The videotaped statement may be used for impeachment (impeachment-only use).