EP#218 | 20 Year Error
About this episode
The episode discusses a significant Supreme Court ruling that clarifies the application of reasonable doubt and credibility assessments in criminal trials in Canada.
**Sponsored by EasyDNS** Move your domain or web hosting to EasyDNS and support Not On Record: https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord Use promo code: **notonrecord** The Supreme Court of Canada has finally stepped in to correct a legal misunderstanding that has influenced credibility assessments in criminal trials for nearly two decades. In **R. v. Berg, 2026 SCC 21**, the Court dismissed the accused’s appeal but used the opportunity to deliver important guidance on the proper application of reasonable doubt, credibility findings, and the landmark **W.(D.)** framework. Criminal defence lawyers **Joseph Neuberger** and **Diana Davison** examine how the Ontario Court of Appeal’s 2006 decision in **J.J.R.D.** was repeatedly misapplied by trial courts, creating the risk of turning criminal trials into impermissible credibility contests. They explain why the Supreme Court unanimously reaffirmed that convictions cannot rest solely on a judge believing a complainant over an accused, and why judges must analyze all the evidence before concluding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This episode explores the presumption of innocence, appellate review, sexual assault trials, credibility assessments…
People in this episode
Guests: Joseph Neuberger, Diana Davison
Sponsors
EasyDNS
Mentioned in this episode
Books & works: R. v. Berg, 2026 SCC 21, W.(D.), J.J.R.D.
More episodes of Not On Record Podcast
- Not On Record REWIND | The Divorce Playbook: How Criminal Charges Start
- EP#220 | Bill C-14: The End of Presumed Innocence?
- EP#219 | Judge's Logic Destroyed on Appeal
- EP#217 | THE DANGER OF GLOBAL CHARGES
- EP#216 | What If They Lied About Their Age?
Explore listener stats, chart rankings, contacts and more on the Not On Record Podcast podcast page.