Good morning.
Thank you for your question, Mr. Caputo.
Although we don't want to start listing examples regarding the assessment of witnesses' credibility, we would nonetheless like to mention the issues that can also apply in the case of victims or other witnesses. We are talking about video appearance systems, that sometimes have flaws in terms of the bandwidth or the technology. There may be audio problems and questions may have to be repeated. So it is not just a question of assessing credibility by looking at the witness's face or body language. There really are issues relating to the actual introduction of testimony. With respect to the section of the Criminal Code you are referring to, the witness is normally in another room and testifies on a closed-circuit monitor or behind a screen. Other measures, in particular in sexual assault cases, also apply to adult witnesses, not just children.
Those are not the same issues as in the case of video appearances. When witnesses are in very remote areas, there may be technological issues. There may also be operational issues. Sometimes, accused persons and witnesses are in the same room when they appear, because there is only one room where the Zoom platform can be used. However, if the trial were held in person, they could be separated.
I think it is very easy to reconcile, because they are not exactly the same issues.