In assessing the credibility of H and his out of court explanation, I must apply the test set out in R v. W.D. (1991) 1991 CanLII 93 (SCC), 3 C.R. (4th) 302 which sets out a three part test as follows: First, if you believe the evidence of the accused obviously you must acquit. Second, if you do not believe the testimony of the accused but you are left in a reasonable doubt by it you must acquit. Third even if you are not left in doubt by the evidence of the accused, you must ask yourself whether on the basis of the evidence which you do accept, you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt by that evidence of the guilt of the accused.
Get a full legal research memo!
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.