Stuart O'Connell Criminal Law Blog

An accused who testifies can be cross-examined on prior inconsistent statements, assuming those statements are admissible. Cross-examination on a prior inconsistent statement may be used to impeach the credibility of the accused, or in an attempt to have the accused adopt the prior statement as true. R. v. Hill , 2015 ONCA 616, at para. 43; R. v. Paris , 2000 CanLII 17031 (ON CA), [2000] O.J. No. 4687 , at para. 41 . Omissions can be integral to the existence of material inconsistencies between two versions of events. An account of an event which leaves out important details may be viewed as inconsistent with a subsequent account that includes those details. R. v. Hill , at para. 45. Impeaching the Accused’s Credibility through his Omissions to Police Generally, an accused’s exercise of his right to silence when questioned by the police cannot be used as circumstantial evidence of guilt or to impeach the credibility of the accused’s trial testimony:  The pro...

Evidence of fear or threats may be relevant to several different issues in a criminal trial, among them, the state of mind of a person who testifies in those proceedings. Threats to a witness, or fear on the part of a witness about consequences following the giving of evidence or testifying in a certain manner, may explain why a witness has strayed from prior versions of the same events. R. v. John, 2017 ONCA 622, at para. 80 . R. v. Cuadra (1998), 125 C.C.C. (3d) 289 (B.C.C.A), at para. 29; R. v. Lawrence (1989), 52 C.C.C. (3d) 452 (Ont. C.A.), at p. 456; Evidence of the Accused’s Bad Character It seems likely to me that a fearful witness, in explaining the reason for the inconsistencies in her statements, and thus her fear, will attempt to give evidence of the accused’s bad character.   If this evidence is admitted at all, it should be limited to the purpose of allowing the trier of fact (e.g., the jury) to assess the credibility of the witness. The trier of fac...