R. v. Wakefield (A.N.) et al., (2015) 610 A.R. 175 (QB)

• Judge: Miller, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta (Canada)
• Case Date: January 22, 2015
• Citations: (2015), 610 A.R. 175 (QB);2015 ABQB 66

R. v. Wakefield (A.N.) (2015), 610 A.R. 175 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] A.R. TBEd. FE.023

Her Majesty the Queen (Crown) v. Addison Nickoles Wakefield and Michael Stanley Charles Mitchell (accused)

(130130263Q3; 2015 ABQB 66)

Indexed As: R. v. Wakefield (A.N.) et al.

Alberta Court of Queen's Bench

Judicial District of Lethbridge

Miller, J.

January 22, 2015.

Summary:

Mitchell and Wakefield faced a charge of second degree murder in the death of the deceased on January 13, 2013. The Crown sought to have four statements made by Taypotat to police officers on January 30 and 31, 2013, admitted in evidence pursuant to the principled exception to the hearsay rule. Taypotat died in April 2013. Her death established the necessity requirement. The only issue was whether the statements were sufficiently reliable to warrant a ruling that they were admissible.

The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench ruled that the statements were admissible, having met the "threshold reliability" test.

Criminal Law - Topic 5420.1

Evidence and witnesses - Witnesses - Admissibility of evidence previously taken where witness unavailable or unable to testify - [See Evidence - Topic 1527 ].

Evidence - Topic 1527

Hearsay rule - Hearsay rule exceptions and exclusions - Where admission of hearsay necessary and evidence reliable - Mitchell and Wakefield faced a charge of second degree murder in the death of the deceased on January 13, 2013 - The Crown sought to have four statements made by Taypotat to police officers on January 30 and 31, 2013, admitted in evidence pursuant to the principled exception to the hearsay rule - Taypotat had died in April 2013 - She was initially threatened with a charge of murder of the deceased, and cautioned at various times when she met with the police officers - The Crown asserted that the evidence of Taypotat established that the two accused were at the location of the murder at the appropriate time and had an opportunity to commit the murder, and corroborated other evidence, including aspects of one of the accused's statements to police - Taypotat's death established the necessity requirement - The Alberta Court of Queen's Bench ruled that the statements were admissible, subject to appropriate editing by counsel so that prejudicial comments were excised - The statements were internally consistent, corroborated by other evidence and met the four-fold reliability test as articulated by the Supreme Court of Canada in R. v. Khelawon; namely, sincerity, perception, memory and narration.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Khelawon (R.) (2006), 355 N.R. 267; 220 O.A.C. 338; 2006 SCC 57, appld. [para. 9].

Counsel:

Erin E. Olsen and Clayton O. Giles, for the Crown;

J. Andre Ouellette, for the accused, Addison Nickoles Wakefield;

A.L. Fay, for the accused, Michael Stanley Charles Mitchell.

This voir dire was heard on January 14-16, 2015, before Miller, J., of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench, who delivered the following memorandum of decision, dated at Lethbridge, Alberta, on January 22, 2015.