![Indigenous Oral History as Evidence: Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (AG) [2022]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/c9c6ac_0aa5bc1ce9da4179b93105ccd402c3db~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_1000,h_1000,fp_0.50_0.50,q_30,blur_30,enc_avif,quality_auto/c9c6ac_0aa5bc1ce9da4179b93105ccd402c3db~mv2.jpg)
![Indigenous Oral History as Evidence: Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (AG) [2022]](https://static.wixstatic.com/media/c9c6ac_0aa5bc1ce9da4179b93105ccd402c3db~mv2.jpg/v1/fill/w_1024,h_1024,fp_0.50_0.50,q_90,enc_avif,quality_auto/c9c6ac_0aa5bc1ce9da4179b93105ccd402c3db~mv2.jpg)
Indigenous Oral History as Evidence: Cowichan Tribes v. Canada (AG) [2022]
Since Delgamuukwi, the oral histories of Indigenous peoples have been recognized as being put on “an equal footing” with documentary evidence.ii Oral history is a means to transmit information orally to record history and preserve Indigenous knowledge.iii The Cowichaniv case was a voir dire to determine the threshold reliability of the oral history evidence of Grant, Guerin and Chief Wayne Sparrow and to allow them to testify without interruption.
The Horrific Consequences of Dangerous Driving
In November 2015, Ken Chung was driving in Vancouver at nearly three times the speed limit towards a major intersection. Chung’s car crashed into a left-turning vehicle causing that driver to die at the scene. It was morning with no rain, but the roads were damp. Traffic was light around the intersection. The roads were wide and straight with dedicated left-turning lanes. The speed limit for both streets was 50 km/h.
Drones: The Deficiency of the Honour System
Drones have become a hot button topic at the dinner table with respect to issues of privacy, trespass, and state surveillance, but the ability of retail drones to facilitate criminal activity seems to have garnered less attention. Drone technology itself isn’t particularly new. It’s origins date back as far as the 19th century “when the Austrians used pilotless hot-air balloons to bomb Venice.”
Mistakes in the Evolving Rules of Delay
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (“the Charter”) establishes in section 11(b) that any person who is charged with an offence must be tried for that offence in a reasonable amount of time.1 Not long after the Charter went into effect, the Supreme Court of Canada (“the Court”) clarified in R v Rahey (“Rahey”) that in order to violate section 11(b), a delay would have to be shockingly long, to an unconscionable degree.
Sexual Interference Case has Broad Impact on Justice System
Friesen was an appeal of the Crown that came from the Manitoba Court of Appeal (“MBCA”) in which the MBCA had reduced the sentence imposed at trial from six years to four-and-one-half years. The offence in question in Friesen was sexual interference and extortion. Friesen had met the mother of the four-year-old victim on a dating site.
