Procédure d'admissibilité d'une photographie

R. v. Andalib-Goortani, 2014 ONSC 4690 (CanLII),

Lien vers la décision

(c)               Authentication

[28]           The leading Canadian case on authenticating images is R. v. Creemer and Cormier, [1968] 1 C.C.C. 14 (N.S.S.C. App. Div.). McKinnon J.A. noted the following requirements for authentication at p. 22:

All the cases dealing with the admissibility of photographs go to show that such admissibility depends upon (1) their accuracy in truly representing the facts; (2) their fairness and absence of any intention to mislead; and (3) their verification on oath by a person capable of doing so.

This formulation has been widely accepted in many subsequent decisions and by numerous commentators: see, for example, R. v. Maloney (No. 2) (1976),29 C.C.C. (2d) 431 (Ont. Co. Ct.), R. v. Penney, supra, R. v. Schaffner (1988), 44 C.C.C. (3d) 507 (N.S.C.A.), at pp. 509-511, R. v. J.S.C., 2013 ABCA 157 (CanLII), [2013] A.J. No. 455 (C.A.), R. v. Adams (2011), 2011 NSCA 54 (CanLII), 274 C.C.C. (3d) 502 (N.S.C.A.), Sydney N. Lederman, Alan W. Bryant and Michelle K. Fuerst, The Law of Evidence in Canada, 4^th edition (Toronto: LexisNexis, 2014), at pp. 44-45 and pp. 1294-1296, David Watt, Watt’s Manual of Criminal Evidence, 2013 (Toronto: Thomson Reuters, 2014), at p. 88 and David Paciocco, The Law of Evidence, 6^th ed. (Toronto: Irwin Law, 2011), at p. 462.