Law360 Canada ( June 26, 2020, 5:35 AM EDT) -- Appeal by the Crown from the respondent’s acquittal on charges of robbery, sexual assault causing bodily harm, uttering threats and unlawful confinement. Towards the end of a nine-day trial, the trial judge, without hearing from the Crown, dismissed the Crown’s application to introduce into evidence the complainant’s unsworn statement to the police as a principled exception to the hearsay rule. The complainant was distraught and had difficulty giving evidence. She absconded before her direct examination was completed. The trial judge dismissed the Crown’s application to introduce into evidence the complainant’s unsworn statement on the basis that the necessity criterion was not made out. He held that the necessity component of the Wigmore approach to the principled application of the hearsay rule could be made out if the witness was not deceased, could not be located, failed to respond to a subpoena, was incompetent, or incapable of testifying. He concluded that the Crown could not meet this demanding formulation of the test. The complainant had responded to warrants and maintained contact with the police. The trial judge concluded she did not want to testify because she did not like the pressure or being put on the spot and talking to everyone....