R v S L

In the case of R v S L, the appellant faced charges of rape and indecent assault, with the complainants being his daughter and sister-in-law. The alleged offences were said to have occurred many years prior to the trial. Confessional statements made by the appellant during a conversation with the complainants were covertly recorded. The central issue before the court was whether these confessional statements were made voluntarily and, therefore, admissible as evidence at trial.

The court considered whether the Crown had discharged its onus to establish that the statements were indeed voluntary. The appellant argued that the statements were not voluntary due to the coercive nature of the conversation. The court undertook a detailed analysis of the circumstances surrounding the recording of the conversation and the context in which the statements were made. The court concluded that the Crown had failed to establish that the statements were made voluntarily, leading to an error of principle in admitting them as evidence.

As a result of the court's finding that the statements were not voluntary, the court had to reconsider their admissibility. The court concluded that there was only one possible outcome available: that the statements were not voluntary. This finding meant that the statements could not be admitted as evidence, and the Crown was unable to discharge its onus of proving the appellant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court quashed the conviction and ordered a retrial, or alternatively, the appellant's acquittal if the Crown decided not to proceed with a retrial.