Justice M.B. Carnegie

The Crown applied under section 714.2(1) of the Criminal Code for an order permitting the complainant in a sexual assault case to testify by videoconference from Florida, where she was residing with her mother due to an unforeseen health crisis and was currently self-isolating after testing positive for COVID-19.

The respondent opposed the application, arguing that videoconference testimony would violate principles of fundamental justice, including the right to face one's accuser and concerns about the solemnity of proceedings.

The court granted the Crown's application, finding that the respondent failed to demonstrate meaningful prejudice to his fair trial interests and that videoconference evidence is a capable substitute for in-person testimony under the Criminal Code framework.

The Crown brought an application under section 810.2 of the Criminal Code for a preventive order restricting the respondent's liberty following his release from incarceration.

The respondent challenged the admissibility of certain Correctional Service Canada records, including psychological assessment reports, correctional plans, assessment for decision reports, and institutional programs performance reports.

The court conducted an evidentiary ruling on the admissibility of these documents, applying the "credible and trustworthy" standard for hearsay evidence in peace bond hearings.

The court found that psychological assessment reports (expert reports) were inadmissible without qualified expert testimony, but that correctional plans, assessment for decision reports, and institutional programs performance reports were admissible as they met the credible and trustworthy threshold and qualified as business records under the Canada Evidence Act.