R v Wilio (Ruling No 1)

The defendant, R, was charged with the murders of two men, Wilio and another individual. The case came before the court to determine the admissibility of certain evidence and the Crown's decision not to call a particular witness. The court was tasked with deciding whether the evidence in question was relevant, whether it infringed the hearsay rule, and whether it could be admitted under any exceptions. Additionally, the court had to consider whether the Crown's decision to not call a specific witness was a matter for judicial inquiry.

The court first examined whether the evidence, which was a self-serving statement made by the accused after the shootings, was relevant and admissible. It found that the evidence was hearsay and did not fall under any exceptions to the hearsay rule. The court held that there was no basis for questioning the prosecutor's decision not to call the witness, as the evidence was inadmissible under any exception. The court also determined that the incriminating conduct evidence, which included the disposal of items, flight from the scene, and threats to a person, was reasonably capable of being viewed by the jury as evidence of incriminating conduct. The evidence passed the admissibility test for incriminating conduct evidence as it was not vague or uncertain.

The court held that the evidence was not admissible as it was hearsay and did not fall under any exceptions to the hearsay rule. The court found no fault with the Crown's decision not to call the witness as there was no basis for questioning the prosecutor's decision. The incriminating conduct evidence was admissible as it was not vague or uncertain and was relevant to the case.

The court made no orders as the evidence in question was found to be inadmissible.