Can comments to the jury which impede the objective consideration of the evidence by jurors be deemed to be objectionable?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from Walsh v. Kapusin, 2009 CanLII 9456 (ON SC):
Para. 16 of Brochu v. Pond, supra, provides that “comments to a jury which impede the objective consideration of the evidence by jurors, and which encourage assessment based on emotion or irrelevant considerations, are objectionable at any time.”
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
What is the test for using the word "similar fact evidence" in a motion where the evidence is not the same fact evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
Does the "real consideration" or extrinsic evidence to prove the “real consideration” generally admissible? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there an obligation of counsel to object to inadmissible evidence in a timely way? (Ontario, Canada)
In determining whether an employer has led sufficient evidence to give rise to a practical evidentiary burden, what is the test for this type of evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
In determining that the contents of the cigarette package was tobacco processed in the form of cigarettes, and in the absence of any evidence supporting that tobacco products contained in the cigarette box contained tobacco, does the prosecution need to call expert scientific evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
In a medical malpractice case, is the evidence of a family physician who has followed a patient for a long period of time the most helpful evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any case law in which the Court has rejected evidence tendered in affidavit form as other affidavit evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
What is the effect of a deemed undertaking on the use of discovery evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
Can a comment be considered a fact or comment? (Ontario, Canada)
How have the principals of the Rules of Civil Procedure apply to evidence that contradicts the evidence given by the complainants in their cross-examinations? (Ontario, Canada)
