Similar Fact Evidence – Using Your Past Against You
The prior conviction was admissible as “some evidence” linking the appellant to the assault on J.S. In the context of a similar fact application, a prior conviction may be tendered to establish an essential element of the prior offence where that element has been placed in issue. The admissibility of a prior conviction does not depend
Read MoreReasonable Forseability – What is an intervening Act?
Courts have used a number of analytical approaches to determine when an intervening act absolves the accused of legal responsibility for manslaughter. For example, both the “reasonable foreseeability” and the “intentional, independent act” approach may be useful in assessing legal causation depending on the specific factual matrix. These approaches grapple with the issue of the
Read MoreDangerous Driving Causing Death
Dangerous driving causing death, a serious criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison, consists of two components: prohibited conduct — operating a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner resulting in death — and a required degree of fault — a marked departure from the standard of care that a reasonable person would
Read MoreWhat constitutes Contempt of Court?
The exception in s. 127 of the Criminal Code will be triggered where Parliament or a legislature has provided a legal foundation for the court’s power to issue contempt orders, defined the circumstances in which a person will be found in contempt, and provided a specific punishment or mode of proceeding. On the basis of R. v. Clement,
Read MoreSelf‑induced intoxication and the Defence to an offence against the bodily integrity of another person
A court must consider the specific principles that govern the insanity defence in order to determine whether s. 16 Cr. C. is applicable. If that defence does not apply, the court can then consider whether the defence of self‑induced intoxication under s. 33.1 Cr. C. is applicable if it is appropriate to do so on
Read MoreDefendant Not Bound by Informer Priviledge
The duty to protect and enforce informer privilege rests on the police, the Crown, and the courts. The latter must not disclose any information that would tend to reveal an informer’s identity. However, the defence is not bound by any such duty in undertaking its own investigation independently of the courts and the prosecution. The
Read MoreThe Offender’s Ability to Pay a Court Fine
The legislative purpose behind s. 734(2) of the Criminal Code is to prevent offenders from being fined amounts that they are truly unable to pay, and to correspondingly reduce the number of offenders who are incarcerated in default of payment. A court may impose a fine only if satisfied, on a balance of probabilities, that the offender has the
Read MoreItalian Seismologists to Stand Trial on Manslaughter Charges
September 28th, 2011 by Joseph Marcus In what has been described as a “medieval-style attack on science,” Italian prosecutors have charged six seismologists and one public official with manslaughter for their role in an earthquake that devastated the town of L’Aquila. The 6.3-magnitude earthquake took the town by surprise on April 9, 2009, resulting in over
Read MoreGet it in Writing…
The crucial importance of the distinction between prosecutorial discretion reviewable only for abuse of process and matters of tactics or conduct before the court governed by the inherent jurisdiction of the criminal trial court to control its own process was fully canvassed and explained inKrieger v. Law Society of Alberta, 2002 SCC 65 (CanLII), 2002 SCC
Read MoreThe truth about Canadian crime rates
BY JOHN MACFARLANE CRIME RATES have been declining in Canada for decades, as a result of demographics rather than policy initiatives. Here, as in other countries, most crimes are committed by young men, and because we have been producing fewer children of either gender there are not as many young men to commit them. According to Statistics
Read More