What is the current state of the law on the admissibility of expert evidence in the context of false confessions?

Wrongful convictions can and do occur despite the justice system’s safeguards (United States v. Burns, 2001 SCC 7 at paras. 1-3, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 283). In Canada, it is accepted that the phenomenon of false confessions is real and can lead to wrongful convictions. The judge was well aware of the phenomenon of false confessions and their correlation to some wrongful convictions. During the voir dire on the admissibility of expert evidence, the judge stated: .… And as I said, no one takes issue with the fact that there is a phenomenon of false confessions. I think that’s well accepted, that there are people out there who, for whatever reason, will falsely confess to a crime -- …. and we’ve had, unfortunately, too many of those cases in Canada. That’s not the question. The question is whether there are experts who can provide an opinion as to whether or not a confession is true or false on the basis of some scientific process and whether there’s a recognized scientific process for establishing the validity of a confession.