Cyber Crimes: Revenge Porn Legislation and its Applicability to 3rd Party Websites
As technology changes, and society with it, the court has been slow to change with it. The distribution of intimate sexual images has increased with applications such as snapchat that allow for sending of temporary images that disappear after being viewed. But what if they are sent over a more permanent medium? What if the recipient opens it and shows it to others? What if the recipient saves the image, with permission from the sender, but then sends it to others or posts it
Confusion in Exclusion: Inconsistencies in the Application of s. 24(2)
The overarching purpose in the application of the Grant test is to determine whether the exclusion of evidence under section 24(2) of the Charter would “bring the administration of justice into disrepute.”While maintaining the repute of the administration of justice is arguably a laudable concern, it takes for granted the fact that there are Canadians who might not view the Canadian legal system as reputable in any sense.
R v. Javanmardi: Clarifying... To An Extent
Ms. Javanmardi was charged with unlawful act manslaughter and criminal negligence causing death. The victim, 84-year old Mr. Matern, had heart disease and came to the accused’s naturopathic clinic with the hopes that naturopathy would improve his quality of life. After conducting a consultation, Ms. Javanmardi recommended a course of treatment with nutrient injections. The victim insisted that the treatment begin that day. He died later that night due to a contaminated nutrie
R v Le and How Race Factors into the Grant Test
At 10:40 p.m., five men, including Le, were gathered in the backyard of LD’s townhouse when three police officers entered. Prior to this, a police officer talked with the housing security guards regarding an unrelated issue, the guards suggested that LD’s house was a “problem address” and there were concerns of drug trafficking in the backyard. Three police officers entered the yard and confronted the individuals, who, by police admission, appeared to be doing nothing wrong.
R. v Rafilovich: Does crime pay?
The case of R. v Rafilovich is an examination by the Supreme Court of important legal issues relating to judicially returned funds that are used by an accused to pay for their legal defence. In this case, Rafilovich was arrested for possession of cocaine for the purposes of trafficking. During a search of Rafilovich’s apartment and vehicle, police found and seized approximately $47,000 of cocaine and $42,000 in cash.
