The Crown applied to admit a video statement from a deceased complainant under the principled exception to the hearsay rule in a sexual assault prosecution.
The complainant had passed away before trial.
The Crown argued the statement had sufficient procedural and substantive reliability.
The respondent opposed admission, contending the statement lacked adequate procedural and substantive reliability and that cross-examination could not be substituted.
The court dismissed the application, finding the Crown had not established sufficient reliability on either ground.
The statement was not made under oath, the declarant was not warned about false statements, and there were inconsistencies with other evidence including the complainant's own handwritten statement.
