R. Meredith

During a jury trial for procuring and related offences, the Crown sought leave to introduce portions of the complainant's prior consistent statements during re-examination to rehabilitate her credibility after cross-examination.

The court applied the test from R. v. Murray and denied the request, finding that the complainant had not claimed her prior statements were lies, but rather offered explanations for inconsistencies.

The court held that admitting the statements would violate the general rule against prior consistent statements and cause prejudice to the accused.

The offender was found guilty by a jury of human trafficking, receiving a material benefit, and procuring.

The court sentenced the offender to 6 years and 2 months for human trafficking and 3 years concurrent for receiving a material benefit, with the procuring charge conditionally stayed.

The court applied the Tang/Miller factors, noting the offender's significant control and coercion over the vulnerable victim over an 18-month period.

The sentence was reduced by 153 days to account for Summers and Duncan credits for harsh pre-sentence custody, as well as mitigation for onerous bail conditions.