The accused was charged with sexually assaulting a five-year-old child.
At trial, the child witness was unresponsive and failed to adopt her videotaped statement to the police.
The trial judge refused to admit the child's out-of-court statements to relatives and the police under the principled exception to the hearsay rule, holding that the Crown failed to establish necessity because it did not present extrinsic evidence explaining why the child would not testify.
The Supreme Court of Canada allowed the Crown's appeal and ordered a new trial, holding that necessity can be established based on the child's inability to testify meaningfully at trial, without requiring extrinsic evidence as to the reason for the inability.
