La synthèse des obligations de la Poursuite en matière de conservation de la preuve

R v K.D.S, 2021 SKCA 84

Lien vers la décision

[60]           In a recent decision, Kalmakoff J.A. succinctly summarized the principles to apply when assessing the Crown’s obligation to preserve relevant evidence: R v Cathcart, 2019 SKCA 90 at paras 27 to 29, 380 CCC (3d) 357 [Cathcart]. Of those principles, the following are germane to this appeal:

(a)               Where an accused establishes on a balance of probabilities that relevant evidence once in the Crown’s possession has been destroyed, the onus shifts to the Crown to provide an explanation for the destruction.

(b)               If the Crown’s explanation satisfies the trial judge that the evidence has not been destroyed through unacceptable negligence, the duty to disclose has not been breached.

(c)               If the explanation offered by the Crown for the loss or destruction of the evidence is insufficient to absolve it of unacceptable negligence, a breach of s. 7 of the Charter is established.

(d)               In assessing the adequacy of the Crown’s explanation, a court must analyze the circumstances surrounding the loss of the evidence. The main consideration is whether the Crown or the police (as the case may be) took reasonable steps in the circumstances to preserve the evidence for disclosure.

(e)               The degree of care expected in the preservation of evidence will generally be commensurate with its relevance.