J. Hechter

The appellant appealed a conviction for assault with a weapon after a trial in the Ontario Court of Justice.

The primary grounds of appeal were that the trial judge erred in admitting an out‑of‑court statement of a witness for the truth of its contents and that the verdict was unreasonable absent reliance on that statement.

The Superior Court held that the trial judge properly applied the legal principles governing hearsay admissibility and threshold reliability.

Although the trial judge misstated certain words from the witness’s recorded statement, the appellate court found the misstatement related only to detail and not substance.

The evidence, taken as a whole, supported the inference that the witness observed the assault.

The appeal was therefore dismissed.

The accused applied in the nature of certiorari to quash a committal for trial on a charge of administering a noxious substance under the Criminal Code.

The evidence at the preliminary hearing showed that the complainant had independently formed an intention to commit suicide and asked the accused to bring drugs and prepare a syringe for that purpose.

The court considered whether preparing a syringe and facilitating drug ingestion could constitute "administering" within the meaning of the offence.

Relying on appellate authorities interpreting the term, the court held that administering requires causing the substance to enter the complainant’s system.

Merely providing drugs or preparing them for voluntary ingestion by the complainant did not amount to administering.

The committal on that count was therefore quashed.