In a first-degree murder prosecution involving the deaths of four female family members, the Crown sought to call expert evidence concerning the sociological phenomenon of so‑called honour killings.
The defence challenged the admissibility of the proposed expert opinion evidence.
Applying the framework in R. v. Mohan and R. v. Abbey, the court considered whether the proposed evidence related to a proper subject of expert opinion, whether the witness was qualified, whether the evidence was logically relevant to motive, and whether it survived a cost‑benefit analysis balancing probative value against potential prejudice.
The court found the proposed expert highly qualified and concluded that cultural evidence about honour killings could assist the jury in understanding the alleged motive without usurping the jury’s fact‑finding role.
The evidence was therefore ruled admissible.
