Relevance of Evidence

Today’s Court of Appeal decision in R. v. Arabia, 2008 ONCA 565 contains a useful dictum about when evidence is relevant:

[69] The threshold for relevance is a modest one. It is enough that an item of evidence proffered for reception could reasonably show that the fact sought to be established by its introduction is slightly more probable (or improbable) than the fact would be without the evidence. 1 McCormick on Evidence (6^th ed.) at § 185, p. 733. Evidence is relevant if, as a matter of logic and common experience, it renders the existence or non-existence of a material fact in issue more or less likely. R. v. Truscott (2006), 213 C.C.C. (3d) 183 (Ont. C.A. ) at para. 22; R. v. Watson (1996), 108 C.C.C. (3d) 310 (Ont. C.A. ) at pp. 323-24; and R. v. B. (L.) (1997), 116 C.C.C. 481 (Ont. C.A. ) at pp. 492-93.