R. v. Balbar

R. v. Balbar

Although necessity was satisfied by the declarant's death, the statements were excluded because they lacked sufficient indicia of reliability: the conversation timing and context were unclear, details were scant, the declarant had serious drug addiction and a reputation for dishonesty, alternative explanations for the bruises existed, and there was insufficient corroboration; Pasqualino was distinguishable on its stronger corroborative evidence.

Citation
2014 BCSC 2628
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Regina; Accused/defendant: Robert Donald Balbar
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
22 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Mr. Big Voir Dire / Oral Ruling on Voir Dire (admissibility of Hearsay Evidence)
Outcome
Impugned statements excluded as inadmissible hearsay.
Legal Topics
Principled Hearsay Exception, Necessity and Reliability, Admission of Out of Court Statements, Character Evidence, Mr. Big Investigation
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Hearsay Voir Dire Principled Hearsay Exception Necessity and Reliability Admission of Out of Court Statements Character Evidence +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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown/prosecution

Robert Donald Balbar

Accused/defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Mr. Big Voir Dire / Oral Ruling on Voir Dire (admissibility of Hearsay Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements made by deceased Heather Hamill to friend C.I. are admissible under the principled hearsay exception (necessity and reliability)
  2. 2 Whether sufficient indicia of reliability exist to admit statements for their truth
  3. 3 Whether the impugned evidence is impermissible character evidence

Ratio Decidendi

Although necessity was satisfied by the declarant's death, the statements were excluded because they lacked sufficient indicia of reliability: the conversation timing and context were unclear, details were scant, the declarant had serious drug addiction and a reputation for dishonesty, alternative explanations for the bruises existed, and there was insufficient corroboration; Pasqualino was distinguishable on its stronger corroborative evidence.

Court Disposition

Impugned statements excluded as inadmissible hearsay.

Orders

  • Ban of publication pursuant to Criminal Code s.486.5(1) and s.486.5(9) regarding identification of undercover police operators
  • Ban of publication pursuant to Criminal Code s.648(1) regarding voir dire evidence heard in absence of the jury