2 total
Accused's statements about prior cocaine dealing to undercover officer ruled admissible to assess confession reliability.
During a murder trial involving a Mr. Big undercover operation, the Crown sought to introduce statements the accused made to an undercover officer about his prior involvement in the cocaine trade.
The defence objected, arguing the evidence was highly prejudicial bad character evidence.
The court applied the framework for propensity evidence and found that the evidence was highly probative to the jury's assessment of the reliability of the accused's confession, as it provided context regarding his sophistication and vulnerability to inducements.
The court ruled the evidence admissible, concluding its probative value outweighed the risk of prejudice, which could be managed with a limiting instruction.
Accused's leg shackles ordered removed during pre-trial motions due to insufficient evidence of security risk.
During pre-trial motions for a murder trial, the accused sought an order to have his leg shackles removed while in the courtroom.
The Crown opposed the request for security reasons, citing alleged gang affiliation, a prior incident in the cells, and staffing pressures.
The court found insufficient evidence that the accused posed a flight or safety risk to justify the continued use of shackles, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The court ordered the shackles removed.
