L'existence d'un enregistrement vidéo de la déclaration, complétée par d'autres éléments probants, peut permettre au juge de première instance de conclure au caractère volontaire de la déclaration extrajudiciaire de l'accusé à une personne en autorité, suppléant ainsi à l'absence de témoignages de certains officiers de police ayant interagi avec ce dernier avant son interrogatoire

R. v. Bools, 2016 ONCA 554

Lien vers la décision

[4]         On the voir dire to determine whether the statement was voluntary, the appellant testified that, at the time he made the statement to the police, he was under the influence of an overdose of prescription medication and was not functioning with an operating mind. In the appellant’s submission, because two police officers who had had contact with him after his arrest and before his statement were not called by the Crown to testify on the voir dire, the trial judge was deprived of evidence that may have corroborated the appellant’s testimony.

[5]         We do not give effect to this submission. Contrary to the appellant’s suggestions, there is no rule of law that the Crown must call each and every police officer who had any contact with the appellant prior to his giving his statement. The onus is on the Crown to prove voluntariness in the context of the facts of the particular case. While the unexplained absence of a witness may raise a reasonable doubt, this is to be assessed by the trial judge on the basis of the record.

[6]         In this case, the trial judge had the benefit of the videotape of the statement, the testimony of several witnesses regarding their contact with the appellant from the time of his arrest up until the time the statement was made, and his mother’s evidence about how he had behaved in the past after overdosing on his medication.