R v Maybir (No 2)

The case of R v Maybir (No 2) dealt with the admissibility of evidence in a criminal trial. The accused, Maybir, faced charges related to assault of young children in his care. The central issue was whether certain evidence of Maybir's past behaviour towards children was admissible. Specifically, the prosecution sought to introduce evidence that Maybir had a tendency to assault young children in his care using his hands or objects for disciplinary purposes, and that he had a tendency to cause harm to young children or be indifferent to the harm caused. The court had to determine whether such evidence was relevant and admissible under the Evidence Act.

The court considered whether the evidence of Maybir's past behaviour had sufficient probative value to outweigh any prejudicial effect it might have. The prosecution argued that the habit of grabbing children by the face was significantly probative, establishing tendencies relevant to the Crown's case. The court acknowledged that while the evidence could inform the jury about Maybir's state of mind, there was a risk that it would be used for improper tendency reasoning. The court found that the evidence of an earlier relationship five years before the relevant events had little probative value and carried a significant danger of unfair prejudice. Consequently, the court held that this evidence was inadmissible.

The court directed that the jury could consider the admissible evidence that Maybir had a habit of grabbing children by the face, provided they were properly instructed on its permissible and impermissible uses. The court concluded that the evidence was admissible as it established tendencies relevant to the Crown's case and had sufficient probative value. The court also directed the jury on the proper use of the evidence to avoid any potential prejudice.