View Post

The Residual Exception to Hearsay Rule and the Use of Corroborative Evidence

In Case Comments, Evidence Law, Hearsay, Hearsay, Teaching Capsules by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

This capsule explores the manner in which corroborative evidence can be used to render hearsay evidence “reliable” and hence admissible under the residual exception the rule. In particular, it assesses the impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in R v Bradshaw, 2017 SCC 35. If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!TwitterFacebookGoogle+LinkedinTumblremail

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

R vs Boone: The Use of Prior Sexual History Evidence

In Case Comments, Cross Examination, Cross-Examination, Evidence Law, Teaching Capsules by Peter Sankoff2 Comments

In this Video Blog, I concentrate on the Ontario Court of Appeal’s use of s. 276 of the Code – to exclude certain prior sexual history evidence. I go on to comment about the utility of section 276, especially given the Court’s decision that the evidence lacked probative value. You might think I’d say, “well what’s the point of s. …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

Ghomeshi Trial: Communication Between Witnesses

In Case Comments, Character Evidence, Character Evidence, Criminal Law, Evidence Law, Sexual Assault, Teaching Capsules by Peter Sankoff2 Comments

In this video blog, I take a look at the ongoing Ghomeshi trial and assess the meaning of cross-examination that took place with the third complainant.  One subject of that cross was the fact that she had exchanged at least 5000 messages with another complainant. What is the meaning of this?  How does it affect the Crown’s case?  I explore …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

Lizotte vs Aviva: Litigation Privilege at SCC

In Case Comments, Evidence Law, My picks, Privilege, Privileges and Immunities, Teaching Capsules by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

In this video blog, I examine the Supreme Court’s recent decision on litigation privilege in Lizotte v. Aviva Insurance Co., 2016 SCC 52. The blog reviews the decision and explains what it does for the privilege, and then considers four big questions that emerge in light of the judgment. If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!TwitterFacebookGoogle+LinkedinTumblremail

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

Offence of “Hit and Run” (10mins)

In Case Comments, Case Comments, Criminal Law, Legislative Reform, Mental Elements, Specific Offences by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

In this video blog I explore a recent decision of the British Columbia Court of Appeal and its findings on section 252 – the “hit and run” section of the Criminal Code. This blog ultimately implores the federal government to reform the Code, as this section is just one of many suffering from some troublesome drafting. If you enjoyed this …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

The Travis Vader Verdict (30mins)

In Case Comments, Case Comments, Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Criminal Law, Homicide, Mental Elements, Procedural Issues by Peter Sankoff1 Comment

Thirty Minutes! I promise not to go this long again, but there was a lot to say here, and a fair bit of legal complexity.  After Thomas J.’s stunning decision to convict Travis Vader using an unconstitutional section of the Criminal Code, most people are wondering, “what’s going to happen to the conviction?”  There are a lot of potential legal …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

Anita Kranjc Trial: Mischief for Giving Pigs Water? (20mins)

In Activism, Animal Law, Case Comments, Case Comments, Criminal Law, Cruelty, Defences, Law Reform, Mental Elements, Physical Elements, Procedural Issues, Video Blogs by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

The Anita Kranjc trial is underway, and it has already raised a host of good legal questions.  I explore them in this video blog.  What is she being charged with? What will the Crown need to prove? Does she have any possible defences? If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!TwitterFacebookGoogle+LinkedinTumblremail

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

R vs Alsager: Working Through Mens Rea Issues (15mins)

In Case Comments, Case Comments, Criminal Law, Mental Elements, My picks by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

In this video blog, I examine the decision of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal in R v Alsager, 2016 SKCA 91. The decision raises a number of interesting mens era issues (issues concerning the mental elements of offences) and is a useful judgment to show how confusing some of these can be to consider! If you enjoyed this post, do …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

R vs DLW and the Crime of Bestiality (15mins)

In Animal Law, Case Comments, Case Comments, Cruelty, Litigation, Video Blogs by Peter Sankoff1 Comment

This video looks at the Supreme Court’s recent decision in R v DLW, released in June 2016, which defined the offence of bestiality. In the blog, I spend the first half addressed the Court’s interpretative approach to criminal law statutes.  In the second, I explain why I think the case is so positive for animal advocates. If you enjoyed this …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email
View Post

Carter, The Assisted Dying Bill and Constitutional Remedies (15mins)

In Case Comments, Case Comments, Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Criminal Law by Peter SankoffLeave a Comment

In this video blog, I explain the impact of the Carter v Canada decision, which struck down the assisted suicide provision of the Criminal Code, but did so in an unusual way. The federal government is trying to enact legislation with an eye on June 6, when the SCC’s decision to “suspend” the declaration of invalidity expires.  What happens if …

If you enjoyed this post, do me a favour and share!Tweet about this on Twitter
Twitter
Share on Facebook
Facebook
Share on Google+
Google+
Share on LinkedIn
Linkedin
Share on Tumblr
Tumblr
Email this to someone
email