Character Evidence: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
The general exclusionary rule for character evidence is on the basis that character evidence is not probative of anything.<ref> | The general exclusionary rule for character evidence is on the basis that character evidence is not probative of anything.<ref> | ||
R v Vant, [http://canlii.ca/t/gjrjd 2015 ONCA 481] (CanLII){{perONCA|Watt JA}} | R v Vant, [http://canlii.ca/t/gjrjd 2015 ONCA 481] (CanLII){{perONCA|Watt JA}}{{at|64}} ("The principal reason that underlies this general exclusionary rule is that the evidence lacks probative value. Character traits, after all, are more dynamic than static, and vary over time and across situations and individuals.") | ||
</ref> | </ref> | ||
Revision as of 22:36, 29 December 2018
Introduction
Character evidence is evidence that invites the trier of fact to make an inference that the person is of a certain "type", thus inferring that the person acted consistently with that type of character. Character evidence can often become prejudicial to the accused and so must be taken with care.
The general exclusionary rule for character evidence is on the basis that character evidence is not probative of anything.[1]
- ↑ R v Vant, 2015 ONCA 481 (CanLII), per Watt JA, at para 64 ("The principal reason that underlies this general exclusionary rule is that the evidence lacks probative value. Character traits, after all, are more dynamic than static, and vary over time and across situations and individuals.")
Topics
- Character of Accused
- Character of Non-Accused Persons
- Similar Fact Evidence
- Alternative Suspect Evidence
- Complainant's Sexual History