The Crown sought to admit a young child complainant’s statements to her mother and videotaped police interview as substantive evidence in a blended Khan and KGB voir dire after the child recanted and testified the allegations were a joke.
The court held that necessity was established, but threshold reliability was not.
The mother’s repeated and highly suggestive questioning, the child’s one-word acquiescent responses, the absence of corroborative physical evidence, the child’s multiple recantations to several sources, and deficiencies in the police interview process undermined trustworthiness.
The videotaped statement was further weakened by the interviewer’s failure to impress upon the child the importance of truth-telling or secure a meaningful promise to tell the truth.
The hearsay statements were inadmissible and, in any event, the court held it would have had reasonable doubt as to ultimate reliability; the accused was acquitted on both counts.
