During a trial for second degree murder, the Crown brought a motion to admit a bloodstain pattern analysis expert report as an exhibit to go to the jury.
The accused opposed the admission, arguing it would be prejudicial and redundant.
The court balanced the probative value and prejudicial effect, concluding that the report should not be filed as an exhibit because it only captured the expert's examination-in-chief, contained unaddressed photographs, and risked over-emphasizing the expert's opinion.
However, the court permitted the glossary from the report to be admitted.
