Facebook content received through mutual legal assistance with USA was admissible evidence in prosecution for defilement of child

Criminal law – appeal against conviction – defilement of child under 17 – appellant social worker at residential unit for boys – appellant had responsibility for the care of the victim – victim 16 years old at the time – victim went to the home of the appellant to cut her grass – appellant and victim had sexual intercourse – manager of residential unit informed of sexual relationship between appellant and victim – appellant denied – victim also denied any sexual relationship – victim’s sister intercepted contact between victim and appellant – matter brought to the attention of manager – mutual legal assistance request made to the United States authorities for material from victim’s facebook account – whether the trial judge erred in allowing the admission of Facebook messages – whether judge erred in acceding to an application to admit evidence under the mutual assistance Act where relevant conditions were not met – whether the judge erred in acceding to admit evidence under mutual assistance Act where messages fell outside the scope of the formal request – whether judge erred in admitting evidence obtained from the United States is contrary to the appellant’s rights to privacy and personal integrity – whether the judge erred in the manner in which he limited the cross-examination of the complainant in respect of his previous sexual experiences – request was made pursuant to the Treaty rather than statutory provision – Treaty is referred to on numerous occasions throughout the request – request was properly transmitted between the designated central authorities – request made complied with the treaty – court fails to see that relevant material which has been authenticated must be of necessity be excluded because it had not been requested – sufficient evidence to infer that the certificate of authenticity related to the material contained on the CD – reference to notes was not victim’s note but rather a note made by a social worker – origin of the information contained in note was not established – appeal dismissed.