Keeping Up Is Hard to Do:
A Trial Judge’s Reading Blog


R. v. JM, 2022 MBCA 25, March 7, 2022, at paragraphs 31 and 32:

     Whether a video statement was made within a reasonable time after the alleged offence involves a case-specific analysis that considers whether there is a satisfactory explanation for the delay and the impact of the delay on the victim’s ability to accurately recall the events (see R v S (P) (2000), 144 CCC (3d) 120 at para 71 (Ont CA); R v WEB, 2012 MBCA 23 at para 22; R v RAH, 2017 PECA 5 at para 42; and R v PS, 2019 ONCA 637 at para 22).

The factors relevant to this inquiry may include the age of the child; the relationship of the child to the accused; the length of time, frequency and seriousness of the offences; any developmental stages which the child may have gone through; and any evidence that something may have influenced the statement or negatively impacted its reliability (see RAH at para 42).