The Crown brought an application during a criminal proceeding to admit prior consistent statements made by two complainants under various exceptions to the hearsay rule.
The court ruled that utterances made by the complainants to civilian witnesses shortly after the alleged events, as well as a 911 call, were admissible for their truth under the res gestae or spontaneous utterance exception.
The court also admitted observations of the complainants' physical and emotional states as circumstantial evidence relevant to consent, and allowed certain statements to police under the narrative and prior identification exceptions.
