R. v. Kembo

R. v. Kembo

The court excluded Sgt. Kalkat's recognition evidence because he had no prior acquaintance with the accused, had only limited and episodic observation (photographs and brief surveillance), could not specify circumstances of observation, and therefore was not in a better position than the jury; his evidence was unnecessary and unhelpful.

Citation
2009 BCSC 1953
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Charles Eli Kembo
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 November 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire
Outcome
Recognition evidence of Sgt. Kalkat excluded; video stills remain for the jury's assessment.
Legal Topics
Identification Evidence, Recognition Evidence, Videotape Admissibility, Witness Familiarity
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Identification Evidence Recognition Evidence Videotape Admissibility Witness Familiarity

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Charles Eli Kembo

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Sgt. Kalkat may give recognition evidence identifying the accused in poor‑quality video stills
  2. 2 Whether the witness was in a better position than the trier of fact to identify the subject
  3. 3 Whether limited prior observation and familiarity renders recognition evidence inadmissible or unhelpful

Ratio Decidendi

The court excluded Sgt. Kalkat's recognition evidence because he had no prior acquaintance with the accused, had only limited and episodic observation (photographs and brief surveillance), could not specify circumstances of observation, and therefore was not in a better position than the jury; his evidence was unnecessary and unhelpful.

Court Disposition

Recognition evidence of Sgt. Kalkat excluded; video stills remain for the jury's assessment.

Orders

  • Exclude evidence of Sgt. Kalkat identifying the accused in the video stills.