The Daviault Defence
In R v Sullivan (“Sullivan”), a joint appeal between David Sullivan and Thomas Chan, the Ontario Court of Appeal (“the ONCA”) declared Criminal Code section 33.1 to be unconstitutional and of no force or effect. In December, 2020, the Crown was granted leave to appeal this decision and, more than twenty-five years after the Criminal Code was amended to include section 33.1.
Mental Health Discrimination and Public Security - Samantha Harvey
The case of Ontario (Attorney General) v G (“G”) is a complex and interesting case that deals with the issues of discrimination based on mental disability, transparency in judicial decisions, and conflicting rights granted under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“Charter”). This case commentary will focus primarily on the discrimination that individuals found not criminally responsible on account of mental disorder (“NCRMD”).
Wilful Blindness - Bob Smith
Author: Bob Smith R v Ducharme (“Durcharme”), coming out of the Manitoba Court of Queen’s Bench (“MBQB”), is a classic case of whodunit. Ducharme is a prison murder case where the security cameras conveniently have terrible angles that make it hard to see where inmates are looking or who they are talking to and do not record inside cells. Also, in Ducharme there were no witnesses to provide additional details. For these reasons, the Crown relied on circumstantial evidence to
the Entrapment Doctrine
In R v Ahmad (“Ahmad”), which involved two different accused, Javid Ahmad and Landon Williams, the police entrapped both individuals by manipulating dial-a-dope operations. Regarding Javid Ahmad, the police received an unsubstantiated tip regarding a phone number associated with a suspected dial-a-dope operation. These operations involve drug traffickers using cell phones to connect with their customers.
Quieting the Right to Silence
The right to silence is drawn from section 7 of the Charter and is one of the principles of fundamental justice that must be adhered to prior to denying a suspect of their right to liberty in the event of imprisonment. The right to silence gives suspects the freedom to remain silent after being detained or arrested, even during interrogation. The purpose of section 7 is to provide a balance between the interests of detainees and the interests of the state.
