2 total
The Court of Appeal ordered a new trial because the trial judge improperly used an unproven lack of motive to fabricate to bolster the complainant's credibility.
The appellant appealed convictions for sexual assault and sexual interference.
The Court of Appeal found that the trial judge erred in assessing the complainant's credibility by finding a lack of motive to fabricate, which was not supported by evidence and improperly bolstered the complainant's testimony.
The court also addressed the standard for production of Children's Aid Society records, noting a lower privacy interest than counselling records.
The appeal was allowed, and a new trial ordered due to the credibility assessment error.
The court upheld human trafficking convictions, properly admitting the complainant's prior video-recorded statements despite recantation.
The appellant appealed a conviction for two counts of human trafficking and one count of assault.
The trial judge admitted two video-recorded statements of the complainant after she recanted at trial.
The appellant argued the trial judge erred in admitting the statements and provided insufficient reasons for rejecting the complainant's trial testimony.
The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction, finding no error in the admission of the statements and determining that the trial judge's reasons adequately explained why the prior statements were accepted and the trial testimony rejected.
