Event and Time
Event Description
This case involves a voir dire hearing in a criminal trial, focusing on the admissibility of various pieces of evidence related to the accused's credibility. The Crown argues against the admission of evidence regarding the accused's claims about Asperger's Syndrome or Autism, while a witness provides an opinion on the accused's trustworthiness.
Application and Claims
- Crown's Submission:
- Argues that the accused's statements about his Asperger’s Syndrome or Autism diagnosis should not be admitted as evidence because they could mislead the jury and unfairly prejudice the case against the accused. - Claims that admitting such evidence would equivocate to reversing the onus of proof.
- Defense's Position:
- Seeking to admit evidence regarding Asperger's Syndrome or Autism to support the accused’s credibility. - Claims that the witness's opinion on the accused's trustworthiness should be considered to provide context and challenge the Crown's narrative.
Judicial Decisions
1. Asperger's Syndrome or Autism Evidence: - Evidence regarding the accused's reference to Asperger's Syndrome or Autism during the ERISP (Electronic Recorded Interview of a Suspect) was not admitted.
2. Trustworthiness Statement: - A statement from a witness, Mr. Rae, indicating that he did not trust the accused was accepted as admissible evidence.
3. Cross-Examination References: - Two references made by the accused regarding cross-examination during his ERISP were not admitted.
Dispute Points and Legal Basis
Dispute Points
- Crown's Arguments:
- The evidence about the accused's mental health conditions could lead to unfair prejudice against the accused. - Admitting this evidence could unintentionally shift the burden of proof away from the Crown.