← Cases

R. v. Cain

2018 SCC 20 [2018] 1 SCR 631 Court SCC Decision date 2018-05-14 Heard 2018-05-14 Docket 37926 English

PartiesHer Majesty The Queen Respondent

Counsel (2)
Solicitor for the appellant: Nova Scotia Legal Aid, Halifax.
Solicitor for the respondent: Public Prosecution Service of Nova Scotia, Halifax.

Judges Wagner, Richard; Karakatsanis, Andromache; Gascon, Clément; Côté, Suzanne; Martin, Sheilah

Delivered by Wagner C.J. (Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, and Martin JJ. concurring)

On appeal from Nova Scotia

Contents

Reasons for Judgment — Wagner C.J. (Karakatsanis, Gascon, Côté, and Martin JJ. concurring)

The Chief Justice — Mr. Cain was convicted at trial of sexual assault, contrary to s. 271 of the Criminal Code , R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46 . He appealed on the ground that the trial judge relied on the complainant’s prior consistent statement for an impermissible purpose, namely, to confirm the truth of her testimony. A majority of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal dismissed Mr. Cain’s appeal, Scanlan J.A. dissenting. Mr. Cain appeals to this Court as of right.
A majority of this Court would dismiss the appeal, substantially for the reasons of the majority of the Court of Appeal. At trial, Mr. Cain challenged the reliability of the complainant’s testimony on the basis of inconsistencies between it and her prior statements to police. The trial judge found that the inconsistencies involved only insignificant peripheral matters, and so he rejected Mr. Cain’s contention that any inconsistencies rendered the complainant not credible or her evidence unreliable. The trial judge did not rely on consistencies between the statements and testimony to bolster the truth of the complainant’s testimony. This was an appropriate use of a prior consistent statement and did not constitute an error of law.
Justice Côté, dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, substantially for the reasons of Scanlan J.A.
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed.

Statutes and regulations cited