In a joint trial for first-degree murder, defence counsel for co-accused Bhupinderpal Gill brought a motion to admit evidence of prior discreditable conduct by Gurpreet Ronald, specifically four incidents where she brandished a kitchen knife during domestic disputes with her husband.
Gill's defence was that Ronald acted alone and the killing was spontaneous, not planned.
Ronald's counsel argued the evidence was irrelevant, not probative, and highly prejudicial.
The Crown argued for modest probative value but admission.
The court found the evidence relevant to the issue of planning and deliberation, but not to the identity of the killer (as Gill's non-involvement was conceded).
The court balanced probative value against prejudicial effect, finding the risk of moral prejudice low and reasoning prejudice manageable with a limiting instruction.
The application was granted, admitting the evidence solely on the issue of planning and deliberation.