The Crown brought an application to introduce prior discreditable conduct evidence against the accused, Victor Perez, who is charged with multiple sexual offences against a 12-year-old complainant (H.D.).
The Crown sought to admit the evidence for several purposes, including demonstrating the accused's awareness of legal requirements for ascertaining age, his awareness of legal jeopardy, to rebut innocent intent or mistake, and to explain his access to a park and communication breaks.
The court dismissed the application for all proposed purposes, finding that the evidence was either immaterial, lacked sufficient probative value, or that its prejudicial effect significantly outweighed any probative value.
The court emphasized that the accused's knowledge of the law on "reasonable steps" was not a material issue, and that similarities between prior and current conduct were not "striking" enough to establish identity or specific propensity, especially given the more serious nature of the prior conviction.