Evidence Overview

Admissibility

In R. v. Nikolovski, 1996 CanLII 158, the Supreme Court of Canada provided the following useful overview of the role and purpose of evidence in any trial:

The ultimate aim of any trial, criminal or civil, must be to seek and to ascertain the truth.  In a criminal trial the search for truth is undertaken to determine whether the accused before the court is, beyond a reasonable doubt, guilty of the crime with which he is charged.  The evidence adduced must be relevant and admissible.  That is to say, it must be logically probative and legally receivable.  The evidence may be that of eyewitnesses, or it may be circumstantial, including the production of physical evidence which is often termed “real evidence”.  In every criminal case, if there is to be conviction, the evidence must be sufficiently convincing that the trier of fact is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused.

Whether charged with a parking offence or with first-degree murder, an individual can only be convicted if a justice is satisfied that the evidence presented by the prosecutor demonstrates the defendant's guilt. The court is bound by the factual portrayal of the events in question: conjecture, speculation, myth, or stereotype can play no part in a finding of guilt.

Relevance and Materiality

The basic principle of the law of evidence is that all relevant evidence is admissible unless rendered inadmissible by virtue of some exclusionary rule. The general rule states that evidence will "only be relevant if it is logically connected to a material fact in the case”. If the evidence proves a fact or the proposition in issue, then it is relevant.

Relevance will be determined according to this general principle on a case-by-case basis, since the ultimate determination is obviously dependent on what issues are material to the case at hand.       

Evidence is material if it is tendered in support of a fact or matter in issue in the case. Whether a fact is in issue is determined by the substantive law related to the offence charged, and rules of procedure.

In a prosecution for a regulatory offence, the prosecutor must prove, beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. date, time, location, ID of defendant;

2. the actus reus, or the prohibited act as defined by the charging legislation; and

3. the mens rea, or the prohibited mental element if applicable.

Evidence will be material if it is relevant to any of these issues.

Standard of Proof

The term "standard of proof' refers to the degree of proof necessary to satisfy the legal or evidential burden imposed on a party. In POA prosecutions there are two standards of proof:

(1) proof beyond a reasonable doubt; and

(2) proof on a balance of probabilities.

A useful way of conceptualizing proof on a balance of probabilities is that the burden fails where the trier of fact is 51% sure that the event happened and a conviction will follow.