During a criminal trial for trafficking in a substance represented as crack cocaine, the court ruled on two voir dires concerning evidentiary admissibility.
First, the Crown sought to admit police Booking Summary Reports and associated mug shots as business records under s.30(1) of the Canada Evidence Act without calling the identification officer who created them.
The court held that the records were administrative in nature and not caught by the investigative-record exclusion in s.30(10), making the mug shots admissible as reliable business records.
Second, the Crown sought to introduce non‑expert recognition evidence from a police officer who claimed to recognize one accused from surveillance photographs based on a brief prior interaction.
Applying the “prior acquaintance/better position” test from appellate authority, the court concluded the officer lacked sufficient familiarity to provide a reliable basis for recognition and excluded that evidence.