View Post

Self-Incrimination & Section 5(2) of CEA

In Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Evidence Law, My picks, Privilege, Privileges and Immunities, Teaching Capsules, Trial Procedures by Peter Sankoff0 Comments

Most lawyers believe that the privilege against self-incrimination in proceedings where a witness is not on trial is completely encapsulated in section 13 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I don’t believe this to be true. In this video blog, I explore a critical situation in which section 13 does NOT provide protection while section 5(2) of the CEA …

View Post

Burden of Proving Mental Disorder (10mins)

In Burden of Proof, Case Comments, Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Core Principles, Criminal Law, Evidence Law, NCRMD by Peter Sankoff0 Comments

In this video blog, I examine the British Columbia Supreme Court’s decision in R. v. Eligu, 2016 BCSC 1487, which addresses a constitutional challenge to section 16(4) of the Criminal Code, the clause that requires applicant’s to prove a mental disorder defence. This case revisits the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision of R. v. Chaulk.

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 …

View Post

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

In Case Comments, Case Comments, Charter of Rights & Freedoms, Criminal Law by Peter Sankoff0 Comments

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 …

View Post

Reversing the Burden of Proof in Summary Conviction Trials (10mins)

In Burden of Proof, Criminal Law, Defences, Evidence Law by Peter Sankoff0 Comments

Talk about flying under the radar. Two days ago, the Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the case of R v Goleski from the bench. In the process, it confirmed that s. 794 imposes a burden of proof on the defendant to prove certain defences and excuses in EVERY summary conviction trial. This is not a good thing. To find out why, watch …