During a voir dire on the voluntariness of a police statement in a prosecution for sexual offences against a child, the accused sought to adduce expert psychological opinion evidence to support a claim that he lacked an operating mind due to depression when he made the statement.
The Crown opposed the admissibility of the proposed expert evidence.
Applying the criteria for expert evidence set out in R. v. Mohan, the court focused on the necessity requirement.
The proposed expert could not provide a formal diagnosis and largely repeated the accused’s own description of his emotional state.
The court held that the opinion evidence was not necessary to assist the trier of fact in determining voluntariness and excluded the expert evidence.
