R v BT

The accused, BT, was on trial for the murder of his infant son. The Crown sought to introduce evidence of prior acts of violence by BT against the deceased baby and other children in his care, which BT argued was not relevant to the murder charge. The trial court had to determine whether the evidence of BT's prior acts of violence was admissible under the provisions of the Evidence Act. Specifically, the court had to consider whether the evidence had probative value in proving a fact in issue in the proceedings and whether the prejudicial effect of the evidence outweighed its probative value.

The court examined the statutory criteria for the admissibility of tendency evidence, focusing on whether the evidence of prior acts of violence was relevant to prove a fact in issue other than the accused's disposition to commit the offence. The court found that the evidence of BT's acts of violence against the deceased baby was relevant to issues such as intent and the absence of accident, mistake, or self-defence, and thus had probative value. However, the court held that the evidence of BT's acts of violence against other children in his care did not have sufficient probative value to outweigh its prejudicial effect, as it did not directly relate to the specific circumstances of the murder charge.

BT was convicted of the murder of his infant son. The court admitted evidence of BT's acts of violence against the baby but excluded evidence of his acts against other children. The decision underscores the careful balancing act required by courts when considering the admissibility of tendency evidence, particularly in criminal cases involving allegations of serious violence.