Ontario criminal | Appeal
FRESH EVIDENCE
Fresh evidence could not reasonably have affected verdict
Accused appealed decision of summary conviction appeal judge which dismissed his appeal from conviction for sexual interference. Accused was convicted was kissing and licking his 11 year-old daughter’s breast. Trial judge acknowledged that complainant had significant credibility problems, but was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt because of corroborating evidence. When complainant was 16 years old she swore affidavit recanting her allegations against her father, blaming her mother for pressuring her into making accusation. At age 20, for purpose of this appeal, complainant resiled from recantation, blaming her father and step brother, and made further allegations against her father regarding illegal drug activity. Appeal dismissed. Fresh evidence was not admitted, as it would not have affected result of trial. Trial judge was fully aware of complainant’s history of dishonesty. Trial judge convicted on count for which there was corroboration of complainant’s account, including contemporaneous observation of complainant’s demeanour following event by her mother and another third party witness, and DNA evidence. In circumstances, fresh evidence could not reasonably have affected verdict.
R. v. M. (P.E.) (Apr. 20, 2012, Ont. C.A., Feldman, Gillese and Hoy JJ.A., File No. C49670) 102 W.C.B. (2d) 444 (6 pp.).
Fresh evidence could not reasonably have affected verdict
Accused appealed decision of summary conviction appeal judge which dismissed his appeal from conviction for sexual interference. Accused was convicted was kissing and licking his 11 year-old daughter’s breast. Trial judge acknowledged that complainant had significant credibility problems, but was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt because of corroborating evidence. When complainant was 16 years old she swore affidavit recanting her allegations against her father, blaming her mother for pressuring her into making accusation. At age 20, for purpose of this appeal, complainant resiled from recantation, blaming her father and step brother, and made further allegations against her father regarding illegal drug activity. Appeal dismissed. Fresh evidence was not admitted, as it would not have affected result of trial. Trial judge was fully aware of complainant’s history of dishonesty. Trial judge convicted on count for which there was corroboration of complainant’s account, including contemporaneous observation of complainant’s demeanour following event by her mother and another third party witness, and DNA evidence. In circumstances, fresh evidence could not reasonably have affected verdict.
R. v. M. (P.E.) (Apr. 20, 2012, Ont. C.A., Feldman, Gillese and Hoy JJ.A., File No. C49670) 102 W.C.B. (2d) 444 (6 pp.).
