Sponsored by EasyDNS
Move your domain or web hosting to EasyDNS and support Not On Record:
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord
Use promo code: notonrecord
In Episode 215 of Not On Record, Joseph Neuberger and Diana Davison examine a troubling trial issue: what happens when a complainant appears to tailor their testimony after reading the defence affidavit in a pre-trial application? The discussion focuses on Section 276 and 278 applications, reverse disclosure concerns, R v JJ, credibility, reliability, and whether cross-examination is enough to protect trial fairness when key details appear for the first time in examination-in-chief. This episode explores the growing tension between complainant participation rights and an accused person’s right to make full answer and defence.
Chapters
00:00 Opening and recent trial win
01:35 Defence affidavits and pre-trial disclosure
04:45 Complainant access to application materials
05:12 R v JJ and Supreme Court guidance
06:31 Alleged tailoring during examination-in-chief
09:37 Can judges restrict complainant access?
16:53 Why cross-examination may not be enough
22:37 Negative credibility findings and trial fairness
Sponsored by EasyDNS https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord
Joseph, Michael and Diana discuss the meaty legal breakdown of His Majesty the King v. J.W., 2025 ONCA 637. They unpack how the Ontario Court of Appeal treats myths and stereotypes in sexual-assault cases, especially delay in reporting and continued association, what’s permissible to argue, and how to ground inferences without crossing into prohibited reasoning. Expect a practical tour of jury charges, prior consistent statements (and their limits), strategic tips for defence counsel, and why careful, collaborative charge-crafting matters on appeal.
R. v. J.W., 2025 ONCA 637 - https://canlii.ca/t/kfdtw
Sponsored by EasyDNS https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord Joseph, Michael and Diana discuss the meaty legal breakdown of His Majesty the King v. J.W., 2025 ONCA 637. They unpack how the Ontario Court of Appeal treats myths and stereotypes in sexual-assault cases, especially delay in reporting and continued association, what’s permissible to argue, and how to ground inferences without crossing into prohibited reasoning. Expect a practical tour of jury charges, prior consistent statements (and their limits), strategic tips for defence counsel, and why careful, collaborative charge-crafting matters on appeal. R. v. J.W., 2025 ONCA 637 - https://canlii.ca/t/kfdtw 🔹Short Description: 🏒Pop culture to case law: Episode 185 breaks down ONCA 2025 J.W. delay in reporting, continued association, jury instructions, and prior consistent statements. ⚖📢🎙 📝Meta Description: Discover Episode 185 of Not On Record: We dissect ONCA’s 2025 J.W. decision—myths/stereotypes, timing of ...
