Law360 Canada ( June 23, 2025, 2:32 PM EDT) -- Appeal by appellant against his conviction for various offences, including assault with a weapon, possession of methamphetamine and possession of prohibited firearms. The complainant (JH) called 911 and reported that the appellant was in her home with a gun, stealing items and threatening her. The police found the appellant in the building with a backpack containing methamphetamine, ammunition and JH’s iPad. Nearby, they discovered an airsoft pistol and a sawed-off rifle with the appellant’s DNA. The audio statement to the police was admitted as evidence under exceptions to the hearsay rule. The trial judge found that the statement was reliable and convicted the appellant of most charges. However, JH was unavailable for cross-examination, and her statement was the primary evidence for the most serious charges. The appellant appealed, arguing that JH’s statement was unreliable and should not have been admitted. He contended that the trial judge applied too low a standard for procedural reliability, accepting safeguards that could not adequately substitute for cross-examination. He also argued that the trial judge relied on corroborative evidence that did not negate plausible alternative explanations in which the statement was false or fabricated. His appeal focused on procedural and substantive reliability issues, including JH’s inconsistent statements, potential motive to fabricate and character concerns....