OTTAWA — The sexual-assault trial of former Afghanistan hostage Joshua Boyle is dealing with more concerns about admitting evidence of the alleged victim's past sexual history.
Boyle, 35, has pleaded not guilty to offences allegedly committed against his wife, Caitlan Coleman, including assault, sexual assault and unlawful confinement.
The offences are alleged to have occurred in late 2017, after the couple returned to Canada following five years as captives of Taliban-linked extremists who seized them during a backpacking trip in Asia.
Coleman, who is now estranged from Boyle, was set to be cross-examined Tuesday following a weeks-long delay over what evidence of their sexual history could be raised by the defence.
An Ontario Superior Court judge ruled in early June that Boyle's lawyer could introduce some of that history, which is unusual in sexual-assault cases.
However the cross-examination now won't happen until at least Wednesday after Judge Peter Doody asked the Crown and defence to consider whether two recent decisions by the Supreme Court of Canada have any bearing on evidence already given by Coleman during direct testimony in March.
While the June ruling covered a request by the defence to introduce evidence concerning certain consensual sexual activity between Boyle and Coleman, Tuesday's concerns surround such evidence that has already been raised at trial by the Crown.
Doody raised six specific things Coleman said in March that he is concerned might now be affected by court decisions delivered since that testimony was given.
In May, the Supreme Court ordered a new trial for Bradley Barton, an Ontario trucker acquitted of first-degree murder and manslaughter in the 2011 death of Cindy Gladue in Alberta. In that case the top court raised questions about information entered into evidence about the victim by both the Crown and the defence, which was said to be prejudicial against her.
And just last week, the high court ordered a new trial for Patrick John Goldfinch, who had been acquitted of a 2014 sexual assault. The Supreme Court said information about a past sexual relationship between the alleged victim and the accused should not have been entered into evidence and refined the rules for when such evidence is acceptable.
Doody is hearing arguments from the Crown and defence Tuesday afternoon, and said he'll deliver a decision as soon as he can about whether the evidence from March he is concerned about will be deemed inadmissible.
Defence lawyer Lawrence Greenspon says he cannot cross-examine Coleman until the decision is made because some of his questions would pertain to the evidence now in question.
