This ruling addresses the admissibility of evidence in a first-degree murder trial.
The Crown sought to introduce "gang evidence" (rap videos, social media posts, and expert testimony) to establish motive and party liability, and an intercepted telephone communication as an admission.
The court found the gang evidence's probative value to be tenuous, as the deceased was not a gang member, and its prejudicial effect (moral prejudice, reasoning prejudice, and risk of unconscious bias against young Black men) significantly outweighed any probative value.
Consequently, the gang evidence and related expert testimony were deemed inadmissible.
However, the intercepted communication, despite its ambiguity, was found to have sufficient probative value as a potential admission and limited prejudicial effect, thus rendering it admissible.
