|
R V B (KG)
''R v B (KG)'', 9931 SCR 740, popularly known as the KGB case, is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the admissibility of prior inconsistent statements as proof of the truth of their contents. Prior to this case, prior inconsistent statements made by a witness other than an accused could merely be used to impeach the witness's credibility, not for substantive purposes. Here, the Court held that if the statements could be found to be both necessary and reliable then the statements could be admitted as an exception to the hearsay rule. Background Four youths were involved in a fight with two men. One youth pulled out a knife and stabbed one of the men, killing him. During the investigation each youth was interviewed on camera in the presence of family or their lawyer. In three of the statements, reference was made to death likely being caused by K.G.B., one of the four youths. At trial, however, the youths recanted their videotaped statements and claimed they had lied t ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Court Of Appeal For Ontario
The Court of Appeal for Ontario (frequently referred to as the Ontario Court of Appeal or ONCA) is the appellate court for the province of Ontario, Canada. The seat of the court is Osgoode Hall in downtown Toronto, also the seat of the Law Society of Ontario and the Divisional Court of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Description The Court is composed of 22 judicial seats, in addition to one or more justices who sit supernumerary. They hear over 1,500 appeals each year, on issues of private law, constitutional law, criminal law, administrative law and other matters. The Supreme Court of Canada hears appeals from less than 3% of the decisions of the Court of Appeal for Ontario, therefore in a practical sense, the Court of Appeal is the last avenue of appeal for most litigants in Ontario. Among the Court of Appeal's most notable decisions was the 2003 ruling in '' Halpern v Canada (AG)'' that found defining marriage as between one man and one woman to violate Section ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Smith (1992)
''R v Smith'', 9922 SCR 915 is a leading decision on hearsay by the Supreme Court of Canada. This decision, along with ''R v Khan'' (1990), began what is called the "hearsay revolution", supplementing the traditional categorical approach to hearsay exceptions with a new "principled approach" based on reliability and necessity of testimony. Background Arthur Larry Smith was accused of killing Aritha Monalisa King. It was believed they had both traveled from Detroit to London, Ontario. While in Canada, Smith had asked King to smuggle drugs back for him. She refused and was killed by Smith. At trial, King's mother testified she received four phone calls from her daughter the night of her death. The last call came from near where her body was found. King had told her mother she would be home very soon. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether the statements could be admissible as evidence. The trial judge admitted the evidence and Smith was convicted. On appeal, the Court of App ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V Khan
''R v Khan'' 9902 SCR 531 is a landmark Supreme Court of Canada decision that began a series of major changes to the hearsay rule and the rules regarding the use of children as witnesses in court. In this case, and subsequently in '' R v Smith'' (1992), '' R v B (KG)'' (1993), '' R v U (FJ)'' (1995), '' R v Starr'' (2000), and finally, '' R v Khelawon'' (2006), the Court developed the “principled approach” to hearsay, where hearsay statements can be admitted if they are sufficiently reliable and necessary. Background In March 1985, Mrs. O and her three-and-half-year-old daughter T went to Dr. Khan for an examination. Khan first examined the daughter in front of her mother, then, while O was changing into hospital gowns in the other room, Khan was alone in his office with T for five to seven minutes. Roughly 15 minutes after leaving Khan's office, the child described to her mother how Khan had sexually assaulted her. A wet spot was found on the sleeve of T's jogging suit, which ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada (SCC; french: Cour suprême du Canada, CSC) is the highest court in the judicial system of Canada. It comprises nine justices, whose decisions are the ultimate application of Canadian law, and grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts. The Supreme Court is bijural, hearing cases from two major legal traditions (common law and civil law) and bilingual, hearing cases in both official languages of Canada ( English and French). The effects of any judicial decision on the common law, on the interpretation of statutes, or on any other application of law, can, in effect, be nullified by legislation, unless the particular decision of the court in question involves application of the Canadian Constitution, in which case, the decision (in most cases) is completely binding on the legislative branch. This is especially true of decisions which touch upon th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Prior Inconsistent Statement
Prior consistent statements and prior inconsistent statements, in the law of evidence, occur where a witness, testifying at trial, makes a statement that is either consistent or inconsistent, respectively, with a previous statement given at an earlier time such as during a discovery, interview, or interrogation. The examiner can impeach the witness when an inconsistent statement is found, and may conversely bolster the credibility of an impeached witness with a prior consistent statement. Impeachment with a prior inconsistent statement Before the witness can be impeached the examiner must have extrinsic evidence of the prior statement. The examiner must also provide the witness with the opportunity to adopt or reject the previous statement. In the majority of U.S. jurisdictions, prior inconsistent statements may not be introduced to prove the truth of the prior statement itself, as this constitutes hearsay Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from an under-oath ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Hearsay
Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from an under-oath witness who is reciting an out-of-court statement, the content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. In most courts, hearsay evidence is inadmissible (the "hearsay evidence rule") unless an exception to the hearsay rule applies. For example, to prove that Tom was in town, a witness testifies, "Susan told me that Tom was in town." Because the witness's evidence relies on an out-of-court statement that Susan made, if Susan is unavailable for cross-examination, the answer is hearsay. A justification for the objection is that the person who made the statement is not in court and thus not available for cross-examination. Note, however, that if the matter at hand is not the truth of the assertion about Tom being in town but the fact that Susan said the specific words, it may be acceptable. For example, it would be acceptable to ask a witness what Susan told them about Tom in a defamat ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
List Of Supreme Court Of Canada Cases (Lamer Court)
This is a chronological list of notable cases decided by the Supreme Court of Canada from appointment of Antonio Lamer as Chief Justice of Canada The chief justice of Canada (french: juge en chef du Canada) is the presiding judge of the nine-member Supreme Court of Canada, the highest judicial body in Canada. As such, the chief justice is the highest-ranking judge of the Canadian court sy ... to his retirement. 19901994 19951999 See also * List of notable Canadian Courts of Appeals cases {{Supreme Court of Canada (1990-2000) ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
R V U (FJ)
''R v U (FJ)'' is a leading case of the Supreme Court of Canada. In the decision the court modified the requirements of admissibility of prior statements. In ''R v B (KG)'', the court required that prior statements can only be admitted for the truth of its contents where it was under oath and videotaped. In UFJ, the court permitted a less strict standard. The complainant A plaintiff ( Π in legal shorthand) is the party who initiates a lawsuit (also known as an ''action'') before a court. By doing so, the plaintiff seeks a legal remedy. If this search is successful, the court will issue judgment in favor of the p ...s prior statement was admitted for the truth of its contents without being under oath or videotaped where the statement was corroborated by the accused confession. The enhanced reliability of the corroboration and the opportunity to cross-examine the recanting witness was sufficient to remove much of the dangers associated with prior statements. References R. v. U. ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Canadian Evidence Case Law
Canadians (french: Canadiens) are people identified with the country of Canada. This connection may be residential, legal, historical or cultural. For most Canadians, many (or all) of these connections exist and are collectively the source of their being ''Canadian''. Canada is a multilingual and multicultural society home to people of groups of many different ethnic, religious, and national origins, with the majority of the population made up of Old World immigrants and their descendants. Following the initial period of French and then the much larger British colonization, different waves (or peaks) of immigration and settlement of non-indigenous peoples took place over the course of nearly two centuries and continue today. Elements of Indigenous, French, British, and more recent immigrant customs, languages, and religions have combined to form the culture of Canada, and thus a Canadian identity. Canada has also been strongly influenced by its linguistic, geographic, and econ ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Supreme Court Of Canada Cases
The Supreme Court of Canada is the court of last resort and final appeal in Canada. Cases that are successfully appealed to the Court are generally of national importance. Once a case is decided the Court will publish written reasons for the decision that consist of one or more reasons from any number of the nine justices. Understanding the background of the cases, their reasons and the authorship can be important and insightful as each judge may have varying beliefs in legal theory and understanding. List of cases by Court era * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Richards Court through Fauteux Court): This list includes cases from the formation of the Court on April 8, 1875, through to the retirement of Gérald Fauteux on December 23, 1973. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court): This list includes cases from the rise of Bora Laskin through to his death on March 26, 1984. * List of Supreme Court of Canada cases (Dickson Court): This list includes cases from th ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
1993 In Canadian Case Law
File:1993 Events Collage.png, From left, clockwise: The Oslo I Accord is signed in an attempt to resolve the Israeli–Palestinian conflict; The Russian White House is shelled during the 1993 Russian constitutional crisis; Czechoslovakia is peacefully dissolved into the Czech Republic and Slovakia; In the United States, the ATF besieges a compound belonging to David Koresh and the Branch Davidians in a search for illegal weapons, which ends in the building being set alight and killing most inside; Eritrea gains independence; A major snow storm passes over the United States and Canada, leading to over 300 fatalities; Drug lord and narcoterrorist Pablo Escobar is killed by Colombian special forces; Ramzi Yousef and other Islamic terrorists detonate a truck bomb in the subterranean garage of the North Tower of the World Trade Center in the United States., 300x300px, thumb rect 0 0 200 200 Oslo I Accord rect 200 0 400 200 1993 Russian constitutional crisis rect 400 0 600 200 Diss ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
