The rule was initially concerned with reliability. As a result, the courts focussed on whether there were inducements, threats, or coercive action by persons in authority that caused the statement to be made. The focus of the court's inquiry was whether the statement had been made to a person in authority in an atmosphere free from "fear of prejudice or hope of advantage": Ibrahim at 609; Boudreau v. The King (1949), 1949 CanLII 26 (SCC), 94 C.C.C. 1 (S.C.C.); . . . . In addition, the courts were concerned with fairness towards the accused, which included notions of oppressiveness and whether the accused had an operating mind when making the statement.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.