During a criminal trial for sexual offences, the Crown sought to admit an alleged spontaneous statement made by the accused after arrest asking about the punishment for sexual assault.
The voluntariness of the statement was not in dispute, but the accused denied making the statement and argued that its reliability and probative value were insufficient.
The court considered the evidentiary threshold and the decision in R. v. Park regarding statements to police.
Given the lack of precise notes, conflicting officer recollections, and the speculative inference that could be drawn from the statement, the court held that its prejudicial effect outweighed its tenuous probative value.
The statement was excluded from the jury’s consideration.
