R. v. T.R.

Summary

Appellant, convicted by jury of three counts of sexual assault, appealed two evidentiary rulings. ONCA dismissed the appeal. The post-conduct sexualized conversation lacked probative value and invoked myths, though the trial judge misstated the admissibility test (paras 7-10). Refusal to admit nurse's notes as past recollection recorded attracted deference absent error in principle (paras 14-15).

Outcome

Appeal dismissed; convictions stand (para 16). Panel found no error that could have affected outcome (para 3).

Why this case matters

The Court of Appeal dismissed a conviction appeal, holding that excluding low-probative, myth-based conversation evidence and refusing past recollection recorded caused no reversible error, and that such rulings attract deference.

Paragraph references

Paras 7-8 (myth and no probative value); para 9 (test misstated: excluded only if probative value substantially outweighed by prejudice); para 10 (no material impact); paras 13-15 (Fliss; deference per Cesar para 60, Youvarajah para 31); para 16 (disposition); fn 1 (s. 486.4 ban).