Is there any case law where evidence giving a different account of events is irrelevant to the test under s.29 of the Criminal Code?

British Columbia, Canada


The following excerpt is from United States of America v. Trotter, 2013 BCSC 1764 (CanLII):

Third, in United States of America v. Lucero-Echegoyan, 2013 BCCA 149 at para. 15, the court confirmed that evidence giving a different account of events or going to the credibility of the requesting state’s evidence is irrelevant to the test under s. 29 of the Act:

While the extradition judge must consider the threshold reliability of the evidence put forward by the requesting state, the judge is not entitled to engage in a broader weighing of evidence or consider the general strength of the case. Evidence that strikes directly at the reliability of the requesting state’s materials, therefore, is relevant at the committal hearing and is admissible. On the other hand, defence evidence that simply puts forward a different account of events, or attempts to show that the requesting state’s evidence is ultimately not credible will not be relevant to the s. 29 inquiry: see United States v. Wilson, 2011 BCCA 514

Other Questions


Is there any case law where a justice in chambers refused to grant leave to proceed with an appeal under s. 25(2) of the Criminal Code? (British Columbia, Canada)
What are the principles that will govern the court's approach to assessing evidence where there are significantly different versions of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Can an accused who otherwise satisfies the requirements of the offence under s. 88(1) of the Criminal Code be excused from criminal liability where the possession of a weapon is necessary for defending himself? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
What are the principles governing the court’s approach to assessing evidence where there are significantly different versions of the evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)
Is a preliminary inquiry judge entitled to exclude evidence under s. 24(2) of the Criminal Code? (British Columbia, Canada)
When there is no risk of danger under section 3 of the Rules of Civil Procedure (3) of the Criminal Code, does a plaintiff have to prove that he was aware of the risk to himself? (British Columbia, Canada)
What is the test for deference under section 14 of the Criminal Code in cases where the credibility of witnesses has been questioned? (Saskatchewan, Canada)
Is there any case law where a challenge to section 7 of section 467.1 of the Criminal Code is heard before the voir dires? (Alberta, Canada)
Can a dangerous and long-term offender be charged under Part 24 of the Criminal Code where the predicate offences arose prior to July 2, 2008? (Manitoba, Canada)
Can a chambers judge proceed under Rule 18A of the Rules of Civil Procedure in a summary trial where there are conflicting evidence? (British Columbia, Canada)