credibility

R v Kinamore: The Problem with Perfect Symmetry in Sexual Assault Trials

The Supreme Court of Canada recently released its decision in R v Kinamore, clarifying that a complainant's sexual inactivity amounts to sexual history under s. 276 of the Criminal Code. Evidence of one’s sexual inactivity is therefore presumptively inadmissible unless first vetted through a voir dire, a pre-trial hearing to determine admissibility. The Court further clarified that this requirement applies regardless of which party introduces the evidence.

APPEAL WATCH: Uneven Scrutiny and Twin Myth Safeguards – A Cry for Clarity 

Earlier in February of 2024, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) granted leave to hear the appeal of British Columbia Court of Appeal (“BCCA”) case R v Kinamore, 2023 BCCA 337 [Kinamore]. The appeal concerns the uneven scrutiny of competing evidence and the application of the s. 276 of Criminal Code, RSC 1985, c C-46 […]

Appeal Watch: SCC to Speak on Stereotypes and Common Sense in R v Tsang

Trial judges have a unique ability to assess evidence in a criminal trial: they see the witness, hear the testimony, and decide whether someone is believable. These findings are sometimes informed by intangibles, things that any person would struggle to articulate. Where a judge fails to articulate the evidence supporting a negative credibility finding, they […]

Assessing Credibility of Survivors: The ONCA Debunking Rape Myths and Stereotypes in R v Steele

Warning: The following post by necessity includes details about an allegation of sexual violence and offensive language. It may not be suitable for all audiences.   Are rape myths and stereotypes still perpetuated by courts? What are the implications of this for survivors of sexual assault? Although the ONCA in R v Steele, 2021 ONCA […]

A Fish to Fry: Another Sharply Divided Court in R v Daley

The Supreme Court of Canada ("SCC") recently released its decision in R v Daley, 2007 SCC 53 [Daley]. Though the majority and dissenting camps agreed upon the content of an appropriate jury instruction for the defence of intoxication, the two sides differed sharply when judging whether or not the trial judge delivered a fair and balanced […]