Ryan Makasare

On a Crown application in a sexual assault prosecution, the court granted testimonial accommodations permitting the complainant to testify by CCTV and with a support person present.

Applying the post-2015 wording of ss. 486.2 and 486.1 of the Criminal Code, the court held that the relevant threshold is whether the order would facilitate the giving of a full and candid account or otherwise serve the proper administration of justice, not whether exceptional circumstances or necessity were shown.

The court accepted evidence from a treating psychotherapist that the complainant experienced intense anxiety and dissociation when discussing the alleged offences and found those accommodations would reduce distress and make it easier to testify.

The court rejected the submission that credibility assessment or jury fairness would be materially impaired by video testimony.

On a voluntariness voir dire in a prosecution involving sexual assault, forcible confinement, and criminal harassment allegations, the court held that the Crown proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused's videotaped police statement was voluntary.

Applying the established voluntariness framework and the operating mind doctrine, the court found there were no threats, inducements, oppression, or police trickery, and that the accused had spoken with duty counsel and understood he did not have to speak.

The court rejected the argument that anxiety, cerebral palsy, ADHD, depression, or a missed dose of medication undermined the accused's capacity to make a meaningful choice.

The statement was admitted at trial.