Table Of Content

Y R A R B LI W A L N KI S A L A R O B EVIDENCE VOLUME 2 Alan Mewett Hamish Stewart Faculty of Law University of Toronto 1999-2000 These materials are distributed solely for classroom use by students in the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto tfURA LASKIN LAW LIBRARY UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO EVIDENCE VOLUME 2 Alan Mewett Hamish Stewart Faculty of Law University of Toronto 1999-2000 These materials are distributed solely for classroom use by students in the Faculty of Law, University of Toronto Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2018 with funding from University of Toronto https://archive.org/details/evidence02mewe Ill Table of Contents 5. CREDIBILITY 373 5(a) Enhancing Credibility.373 5(a)(i) Expert Evidence.373 R. v. Kyselka et al.373 R. v. Marquard.375 5(a)(ii)Prior Consistent Statements.381 R. v. Giraldi.381 R. v. Rozich.384 5(b) Impeaching Credibility.389 5(b)(i) Expert Evidence.389 Toohey v. Metropolitan Police Commissioner.389 R. v. French.393 5(b)(ii)Prior Inconsistent Statements: Other Party’s Witness.398 5(b)(iii) Prior Inconsistent Statements: Own Witness.398 5(b)(iv) Prior Convictions.402 R. v. St. Pierre.402 Morris v. The Queen.404 Corbett v. The Queen.415 Applying Corbett.442 5(b)(v)Duty to Cross-Examine.443 5(b)(vi) The Collateral Facts Bar.445 R. v. Rafael.445 Defining “Collateral Facts”.446 Problems on Collateral Facts.448 Exceptions to the Collateral Facts Bar.452 5(c) Reputation for Veracity.453 R. v. Clarke.453 5(d) Assessing the Credibility of Children.463 R. v. B. (G.).463 5(e) Corroboration.467 R. v. Baskerville.467 R. v. Ethier.469 Vetrovec v. The Queen; Gaja v. The Queen.471 R. v. B. (G.).482 6. CHARACTER 490 6(a) Character Directly in Issue.490 iv 6(b) Character as Circumstantial Evidence.490 6(c) Putting Character in Issue.490 . R v. McNamara et al. (No. 1).491 6(d) Methods of Proving Character: Accused Persons.495 6(d)(i) Reputation.495 NOTE: R. v. Rowton.495 R. v. Levasseur.496 R. v. Profit (Ont.C.A.).500 R. v. Profit (S.C.C.).508 6(d)(ii)Specific Acts.509 • R. v. McNamara et al. (No. 1).509 6(d)(iii) Psychiatric Evidence of Disposition.512 • R. v. Lupien.512 • R. v. Robertson.516 -R. v. Mohan.518 'Morin v. R.528 6(e) Methods of Proving Character: Third Party Suspects.534 ' R. v. McMillan.534 6(f) Methods of Proving Character: Victims.540 • R. v. Scopelliti.540 7. SIMILAR FACT EVIDENCE 548 ' Makin v. Attorney-General for New South Wales.548 • R. v. Smith.549 • R. v. Straffen.550 • NOTE: Director of Public Prosecutions v. Boardman.554 • Sweitzer v. The Queen.562 » R. v. B.(C.R.).566 •R. v. C.(M.EL).578 R. v. B. (L.).580 Note: R. v. Arp.599 8. STATEMENTS BY ACCUSED PERSONS: COMMON LAW 605 8(a) Introduction.605 8(b) Pre-Trial Silence.605 • R. v. Eden.605 • R. v. Sweeney (No. 2).607 ’ R. v. Sayegh (No. 3).611 R. v. Chambers.613 V 8(c) Consciousness of Guilt.619 * R. v. Arcangioli.619 R. v. White.622 8(d) Statements to Persons in Authority.630 8(d)(i) Who is a Person in Authority?.630 #R. v. Rothman.630 R. v. Hodgson. 637 8(d)(ii)The Voir Dire.649 8(d)(iii) Voluntariness: Fear of Prejudice or Hope of Advantage.650 ♦ Ibrahim v. The King.650 Some Examples of Statements Induced by Police.652 8(d)(iv) Voluntariness: Operating Mind. 654 • Ward v. R.654 - Horvath v. The Queen.656 8(d)(v)Voluntariness: Oppression.671 Note on Oppressive Questioning.671 R. v. Serack.672 8(d)(vi) Confession Confirmed by Subsequent Fact.673 • Rex v. St. Lawrence.673