R. v. Broomfield (S.L.), (2010) 303 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 344 (NLTD(G))

• Judge: Goodridge, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador (Canada)
• Case Date: December 16, 2010
• Jurisdiction: Newfoundland and Labrador
• Citations: (2010), 303 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 344 (NLTD(G))

R. v. Broomfield (S.L.) (2010), 303 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 344 (NLTD(G));

    941 A.P.R. 344

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2010] Nfld. & P.E.I.R. TBEd. DE.028

Stanley Broomfield (applicant) v. Her Majesty the Queen (respondent)

(201004T0090; 201004T0092; 201004T0094; 2010 NLTD(G) 202)

Indexed As: R. v. Broomfield (S.L.)

Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court

Trial Division (General)

Goodridge, J.

December 20, 2010.

Summary:

The accused was charged with multiple counts of sexual touching, assault and uttering threats. He sought an order compelling the Crown to prepare and disclose a typed transcript for each of the eight DVD video recordings of witness interviews. These recordings include statements taken from five child witnesses. The intention of the Crown was to have these recordings submitted as evidence at trial pursuant to s. 715.1(1) of the Criminal Code.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), allowed the application. The accused's argument based on the legal duty on the Crown to disclose all relevant information was rejected. However, his argument that typed transcripts were necessary because of quality issues with the DVDs and to ensure compliance with s. 715.1 (possible exclusion of parts) and to ensure compliance with the rules of evidence was accepted.

Civil Rights - Topic 3133

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right of accused to make full answer and defence - The accused was charged with multiple counts of sexual touching, assault and uttering threats - He sought an order compelling the Crown to prepare and disclose a typed transcript for each of the eight DVD video recordings of witness interviews - These recordings include statements taken from five child witnesses - The intention of the Crown was to play the DVDs in court as if the child witnesses were giving evidence in open court pursuant to s. 715.1(1) of the Criminal Code - The accused argued that, without disclosure of a transcript, his right to full answer and defence (Charter, s. 7) and his right to a fair trial (Charter, s. 11(d)) would be compromised - The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), rejected the argument that production and delivery of a typed transcript of the video recordings was part of the legal duty on the Crown to disclose all relevant information - The evidence that the Crown intended to rely upon was the DVDs, and they had already been disclosed - See paragraphs 6 to 12.

Civil Rights - Topic 3157

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right to just and fair trial - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3133 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 4505

Procedure - Trial - Special duties of Crown - Duty to disclose evidence prior to trial - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3133 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5464

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence of children - Out of court testimony (incl. videotaped statements) - The accused was charged with multiple counts of sexual touching, assault and uttering threats - He sought an order compelling the Crown to prepare and disclose a typed transcript for each of the eight DVD video recordings of witness interviews - These recordings include statements taken from five child witnesses - The Crown's intention was play the DVDs in court as if the child witnesses were giving evidence in open court pursuant to s. 715.1(1) of the Criminal Code - The accused argued that the failure to provide a transcript of the DVDs would hamper the court's ability to ensure compliance with the requirements of s. 715.1 - He had challenged parts of the recorded statements due to the poor audio quality and due to the manner in which questions were presented - The Crown had to satisfy the court on the admissibility of any DVD video recorded evidence that it intended to tender under s. 715.1 - The Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), allowed the application - Typed transcripts were necessary for the court and jury because of quality issues with the DVDs and to ensure compliance with s. 715.1 (possible exclusion of parts) and to ensure compliance with the rules of evidence - See paragraphs 13 to 22.

Criminal Law - Topic 5464

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence of children - Out of court testimony (incl. videotaped statements) - [See Civil Rights - Topic 3133 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Stinchcombe, [1991] 3 S.C.R. 326; 130 N.R. 277; 120 A.R. 161; 8 W.A.C. 161; 68 C.C.C.(3d) 1; 8 C.R.(4th) 277, refd to. [para. 6].

R. v. Ivarluk (D.), [2005] Nunavut Cases 5; 63 W.C.B.(2d) 346; 2005 NUCJ 5, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. D.O.L., [1993] 4 S.C.R. 419; 161 N.R. 1; 88 Man.R.(2d) 241; 51 W.A.C. 241; 85 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 16].

R. v. Sherratt (C.P.) (1998), 66 O.T.C. 122; 39 W.C.B.(2d) 139 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 17].

Counsel:

Sandi MacKinnon, for the applicant;

Michael Fox, for the respondent.

This application was heard at Corner Brook, NL, on December 16, 2010, before Goodridge, J., of the Newfoundland and Labrador Supreme Court, Trial Division (General), who released the following reasons for judgment on December 20, 2010.