A Caution-ary Tale: R v Tessier and the Impact of the Absence of Police Cautions on the Admissibility of Statements Under the Confessions Rule
The admissibility of statements made to police has been widely debated in the legal community. Due to previous police misconduct during interrogations, the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) developed a common law rule to determine the admissibility of these statements to persons of authority, such as the police, called the “confessions rule.”However, what happens when police do not caution a suspect before questioning and the Crown subsequently seeks to admit statements made?
The Disappearance of Criminal Law: Police Powers and The Supreme Court: A Review
One of the topics in the book written by Richard Jochelson, Kirsten Kramar, and Mark Doerksen is on the right to silence and counsel. The accused’s right to silence and counsel are both crucial to our justice system and the rights of accused. The authors explain that the right to silence essentially entails that accused have the right to not answer what the officers ask them; officers will continue to interrogate, but the accused can remain silent.
