Closely aligned with the trial judge’s failure to conduct a proper reliability analysis was his piecemeal approach to analysing the complainant’s evidence without standing back and asking himself whether – even though he accepted her explanations – the various factors that could favour the defence taken together could nonetheless give rise to a reasonable doubt and, more specifically, whether the absence of evidence in material areas could be the basis for a reasonable doubt: R v. Lifchus, 1997 CanLII 319 (SCC), [1997] 3 S.C.R. 320. As the trial judge noted, the defence does not have to prove anything.
"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.