EP#182 | Analysis of a Child's Evidence in a Sexual Interference Case

Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

In this solo episode, Joseph breaks down R. v. D.D., 2025 ONCJ 355 (Sudbury) to show how courts assess child-complainant evidence in sexual interference cases covering the s. 715.1 video-statement rule, the dangers of leading questions, gaps around initial disclosure, and the W.(D.) framework for credibility vs. reliability that ultimately produced an acquittal on reasonable doubt. Along the way he offers practical defence insights (why “no opportunity” absolutes backfire, how to mine inconsistencies between in-court testimony and the video) and a quick primer on how judges tailor reliability analysis for young witnesses without lowering the burden of proof. It’s an instructive case study shaped by viewer questions delivered with a bit of levity (a nod to Ghostbusters and Mr. Stay Puft) and supported by our friends at EasyDNS.

Sponsored by EasyDNS
https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord

🔹Short Description:
🏒 EP#182 Joseph unpacks R. v. D.D., 2025 ONCJ 355 (Sudbury)—how courts assess child-complainant evidence in sexual interference cases, from s. 715.1 video statements and leading questions to the W.(D.) credibility-vs-reliability analysis that ended in an acquittal.⚖️📢🎙️

📝Meta Description:
📢 In EP#182 R. v. D.D. (2025 ONCJ 355) explained: child witness reliability, s. 715.1 video statements, leading questions, and W.(D.) analysis in a sexual interference case. 🎧🧑‍⚖️🏒

|Not On Record

😍 𝐈 𝐇𝐎𝐏𝐄 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐆𝐔𝐘𝐒 𝐄𝐍𝐉𝐎𝐘 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐒!
▶ If you enjoy this video, please like it and share it.
▶ Don't forget to subscribe to this channel for more updates.
▶ Subscribe now: https://www.youtube.com/@NotOnRecord?sub_confirmation=1

⚡️ 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐍𝐄𝐂𝐓 𝐖𝐈𝐓𝐇 𝐔𝐒:
👉 Website: www.notonrecordpodcast.com
👉 Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/
👉 Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord
👉 Twitter: https://x.com/notonrecord
👉 Email: [email protected]

🎬 𝐖𝐀𝐓𝐂𝐇 𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐎𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐑 𝐕𝐈𝐃𝐄𝐎𝐒:
▶ https://youtu.be/-fz8YHFmKeo
▶ https://youtu.be/XzKgI6Plxc8
▶ https://youtu.be/ZajyU-72liI
▶ https://youtu.be/6fKGT83GIBM
▶ https://youtu.be/GdGgX04Mu5A

🔔 𝐒𝐔𝐁𝐒𝐂𝐑𝐈𝐏𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐊:
▶ https://www.youtube.com/@NotOnRecord?sub_confirmation=1

⚠️ 𝐃𝐈𝐒𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐈𝐌𝐄𝐑: We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of watching any of my publications. You acknowledge that you use the information I provide at your own risk. do your own research.

✖️ 𝐂𝐎𝐏𝐘𝐑𝐈𝐆𝐇𝐓 𝐍𝐎𝐓𝐈𝐂𝐄: This video and my YouTube channel contain dialog, music, and image that are property of " Not On Record " You are authorized to share the video link and channel and embed this video in your website or others as long as a link back to my YouTube Channel is provided

@NotOnRecord

▶ 𝐑𝐄𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐄𝐃 𝐊𝐄𝐘𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐃𝐒:- #ep181 #notonrecord #hockeycanadatrial #hockeycanada #trialverdict #courtroomanalysis #legalpodcast #truecrimepodcast #canadianjustice #legalverdict #highprofiletrial #realcasebreakdown #legalcommentary #truthandjustice #courtroomdrama #canadianlegalnews #justiceinspotlight #sportscontroversy #legaldiscussion #lawandorderpodcast #consentinsports #Castledoctrine #legalanalysis #justiceforvictims #publicreaction #caseverdict #crimeandlaw #home

Please share with your friends and family. Also don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell to notify you if I post a new video. Much love and God bless

In this solo episode, Joseph breaks down R. v. D.D., 2025 ONCJ 355 (Sudbury) to show how courts assess child-complainant evidence in sexual interference cases covering the s. 715.1 video-statement rule, the dangers of leading questions, gaps around initial disclosure, and the W.(D.) framework for credibility vs. reliability that ultimately produced an acquittal on reasonable doubt. Along the way he offers practical defence insights (why “no opportunity” absolutes backfire, how to mine inconsistencies between in-court testimony and the video) and a quick primer on how judges tailor reliability analysis for young witnesses without lowering the burden of proof. It’s an instructive case study shaped by viewer questions delivered with a bit of levity (a nod to Ghostbusters and Mr. Stay Puft) and supported by our friends at EasyDNS.

R. v. Hodgson, 2024 SCC 25 - https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2024/2024canlii11123/2024canlii11123.html?resultId=faf026722dfb4b3a9e3dc803930bbd9b&searchId=2025-09-07T08:08:30:114/750c412190cc49eba6030d6a4fba89fa

R. v. Khill, 2021 SCC 37 (CanLII), [2021] 2 SCR 948 - https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2021/2021scc37/2021scc37.html?resultId=106af67b2fdf4afd82ff35a092a71ebc&searchId=2025-09-07T08:11:40:226/e117a95adc244d88b9ab89e6f5053778

Website: http://www.NotOnRecordpodcast.com
Sign up to our email list - http://eepurl.com/hw3g99 Social Media Links
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/NotonRecord
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/notonrecordpodcast/
TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@notonrecordpodcast
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/notonrecord
Telegram: https://t.me/NotOnRecord
Minds: http://www.minds.com/notonrecord

Audio Platforms Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4F2ssnX7ktfGH8OzH4QsuX Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/not-on-record-podcast/id1565405753
SoundCloud: https://soundcloud.com/notonrecord
Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-842207
For more information on criminal law issues go to Neuberger & Partners LLP http://www.nrlawyers.com.
Produced by Possibly Correct Media www.PossiblyCorrect.com
#Podcast #law #MeToo