R. v. Christhurajah

R. v. Christhurajah

Application to exclude identification evidence was dismissed because the RCMP photo identification was conducted with an adequate and disclosed record (transcript, audio, photo book) permitting meaningful cross-examination, the first identification (RCMP Sept 29, 2010) was the most probative and was not shown to have been tainted by later CBSA contacts, and the prejudicial effect did not outweigh probative value.

Citation
2016 BCSC 2549
Parties
Crown/prosecution: Regina; Accused: Kunarobinson Christhurajah; Accused: Lesly Jana Emmanuel; Accused: Nadarajah Mahendran; Accused: Thampeernayagam Rajaratnam
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 November 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Voir Dire (identification Evidence)
Outcome
Application to exclude identification evidence dismissed; identification evidence admitted
Legal Topics
Eyewitness Identification, Photo Lineup Admissibility, Prejudicial Vs Probative, Voir Dire, Extrajudicial Identification, Sophonow Recommendations
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Immigration Law Eyewitness Identification Photo Lineup Admissibility Prejudicial Vs Probative Voir Dire Extrajudicial Identification +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 18 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown/prosecution

Kunarobinson Christhurajah

Accused

Lesly Jana Emmanuel

Accused

Nadarajah Mahendran

Accused

Thampeernayagam Rajaratnam

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Voir Dire (identification Evidence)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether identification evidence of Migrant B408 identifying Mr. Mahendran is admissible
  2. 2 Whether the prejudicial effect of the identification evidence outweighs its probative value
  3. 3 Whether RCMP and CBSA photo procedures were flawed and whether any flaws tainted the identification

Ratio Decidendi

Application to exclude identification evidence was dismissed because the RCMP photo identification was conducted with an adequate and disclosed record (transcript, audio, photo book) permitting meaningful cross-examination, the first identification (RCMP Sept 29, 2010) was the most probative and was not shown to have been tainted by later CBSA contacts, and the prejudicial effect did not outweigh probative value.

Court Disposition

Application to exclude identification evidence dismissed; identification evidence admitted

Orders

  • Application to exclude B408 identification evidence dismissed
  • Crown permitted to lead B408 in-court identification and RCMP photo identification evidence from Sept 29, 2010