R. v. Khelawon
Encyclopedia
R. v. Khelawon, 2006 SCC 57 is a leading decision by the Supreme Court of Canada
on the principled approach to hearsay
evidence.
. Four of the alleged victims died before trial from unrelated causes. The fifth was found incompetent to testify. Two of the deceased complainants, Mr. Skupien and Mr. Dinino, had given videotaped statements to police, concerning the alleged incidents.
Since the declarants were deceased, the videotaped statements became hearsay
, and the issue for the trial judge was whether or not the statements were reliable enough to be admitted.
The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed Khelawon's appeal. Justice Rosenberg (Justice Armstrong concurring) rejected the statements, while Justice Blair (dissenting) would have admitted the statements and dismissed the appeal. The Crown sought leave to appeal to the SCC to restore Khelawon's convictions. Leave to appeal was allowed in respect of Mr. Skupien's statement, but denied in respect of Mr. Dinino's statement.
.
In particular, the bar that Starr erected on the use of corroborative evidence in the threshold reliability assessment no longer applies. Instead of categorizing reliability factors into discreet, non-mutually exclusive threshold and ultimate stages, courts should now "adopt a more functional approach... and focus on the particular dangers raised by the hearsay evidence sought to be introduced and on those attributes or circumstances relied upon by the proponent to overcome those dangers". In effect, trial judges may now consider evidence going beyond the circumstances under which the statement was made at the threshold reliability stage, which includes corroborative and/or conflicting evidence.
Supreme Court of Canada
The Supreme Court of Canada is the highest court of Canada and is the final court of appeals in the Canadian justice system. The court grants permission to between 40 and 75 litigants each year to appeal decisions rendered by provincial, territorial and federal appellate courts, and its decisions...
on the principled approach to hearsay
Hearsay
Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. As a legal term, "hearsay" can also have the narrower meaning of...
evidence.
Facts
Ramnarine Khelawon was accused of aggravated assault, uttering a death threat, assault causing bodily harm, and assault with a weapon. The offences involved five residents of a nursing home, in which Khelawon worked as a registered nurseRegistered nurse
A registered nurse is a nurse who has graduated from a nursing program at a university or college and has passed a national licensing exam. A registered nurse helps individuals, families, and groups to achieve health and prevent disease...
. Four of the alleged victims died before trial from unrelated causes. The fifth was found incompetent to testify. Two of the deceased complainants, Mr. Skupien and Mr. Dinino, had given videotaped statements to police, concerning the alleged incidents.
Since the declarants were deceased, the videotaped statements became hearsay
Hearsay
Hearsay is information gathered by one person from another person concerning some event, condition, or thing of which the first person had no direct experience. When submitted as evidence, such statements are called hearsay evidence. As a legal term, "hearsay" can also have the narrower meaning of...
, and the issue for the trial judge was whether or not the statements were reliable enough to be admitted.
Courts below
The trial judge, Grossi J., "...held that the hearsay statements from each of the complainants were sufficiently reliable to be admitted in evidence, based in large part on the 'striking' similarity between them". Khelawon was convicted.The Court of Appeal for Ontario allowed Khelawon's appeal. Justice Rosenberg (Justice Armstrong concurring) rejected the statements, while Justice Blair (dissenting) would have admitted the statements and dismissed the appeal. The Crown sought leave to appeal to the SCC to restore Khelawon's convictions. Leave to appeal was allowed in respect of Mr. Skupien's statement, but denied in respect of Mr. Dinino's statement.
Supreme Court of Canada
Justice Charron delivered the SCC's unanimous decision. The Court held that Mr. Skupien's statement was inadmissible, as it was not sufficiently reliable. In delivering the Court's decision, Justice Charron rendered a major alteration to the threshold reliability branch of the principled approach, effectively overruling this portion of R. v. StarrR. v. Starr
R. v. Starr [2000] 2 S.C.R. 144 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision that re-evaluated several principles of evidence. In particular, they held that the "principled approach" hearsay evidence under R. v. Khan and R. v. Smith can be equally used to exclude otherwise inclusive hearsay...
.
In particular, the bar that Starr erected on the use of corroborative evidence in the threshold reliability assessment no longer applies. Instead of categorizing reliability factors into discreet, non-mutually exclusive threshold and ultimate stages, courts should now "adopt a more functional approach... and focus on the particular dangers raised by the hearsay evidence sought to be introduced and on those attributes or circumstances relied upon by the proponent to overcome those dangers". In effect, trial judges may now consider evidence going beyond the circumstances under which the statement was made at the threshold reliability stage, which includes corroborative and/or conflicting evidence.
See also
- List of Supreme Court of Canada cases
- R. v. SmithR. v. Smith (1992)R. v. Smith, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 915 is a leading decision on hearsay by the Supreme Court of Canada. This decision, long with R. v. Khan , began was is called the "hearsay revolution" supplementing the traditional categorical approach to hearsay exceptions with a new "principled approach" based on...
(1992) - R. v. KhanR. v. KhanR. v. Khan [1990] 2 S.C.R. 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 , R. v. B. , R. v. U. , R. v. Starr , and finally,...
(1990)