In a sexual assault case, in what circumstances will the accused have his statements excluded?

The accused also argued that his statements should be excluded because of the overstatement made by the police about the identification of the accused by the woman riding the horse. He relied upon the judgment of Lamer J. (as he then was) in Rothman v. The Queen, 1981 CanLII 23 (SCC), [1981] 1 S.C.R. 640, that a statement induced in circumstances that would bring the administration of justice into disrepute will be inadmissible. In that case, however, Lamer J. also said at 697: It must also be borne in mind that the investigation of crime and the detection of criminals is not a game to be governed by the Marquess of Queensbury rule. The authorities, in dealing with shrewd and often sophisticated criminals, must sometimes of necessity resort to trick or other forms of deceit and should not through the rule be hampered in their work. What should be repressed vigorously is conduct on their part that shocks the community.