Skip to content

The ReeveLaw Blog

Criminal Defence Law Blog

POLICE RECORD CHECKS – If you’re wondering if that old indiscretion will be reported on a “criminal record check”, here is a summary of what can and cannot be disclosed in each level of record checks.

Posted bywpengine 18 April 2019

Source: Police record checks | Ministry of the Solicitor General

Posted bywpengine18 April 2019Posted inUncategorized

Post navigation

Previous post Previous post:
ARE ELECTRONIC SEXUAL CONVERSATIONS PRIVATE? – Not if it’s with a child (or someone pretending to be a child) that you don’t know. In such a case you have no reasonable expectation of privacy, our Supreme Court says. (R. v. Mills) I wonder if that’s going to apply to all electronic communications involved in any alleged crime? Here is the “Case in Brief”.
Next post Next post:
After deciding that the determination of whether a ‘reasonable expectation of privacy” exists in communications is contextual, have now found that the nature of the relationship is context. Specifically (?) you do not have an expectation of privacy in a sexual communication with someone you believe to be a child, who is a stranger to you.

Recent Posts

  • Credit also has to be given to JAMES LOCKYER for his tireless advocacy over many years to bring this to fruition.
  • Lawyers in England are refusing to represent some people because their legal aid system is insufficient to maintain a viable practice. The legal aid system in Ontario is similarly perpetually on the brink.
  • Since 1982 accused persons have had the right to a trial within a reasonable time. We’ve had the Askov, Morin and now the Jordan cases of the Supreme Court of Canada trying to ensure that right, with only limited success. So now the courts are stacking cases on top of other cases on their daily trial lists that have no possibility of being reached for trial on that date.
  • JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED – Every person charged with a criminal offence has the constitutional right to have their trial held within a reasonable time. Our Supreme Court has twice attempted to define what is reasonable through the cases of Askov and Jordan. The result has been decades of hundreds of cases being “stayed” from proceeding due to delay and further delays caused by the complex application procedures required to assert that right. Nothing has changed. Simply demanding that the trial process proceed expeditiously doesn’t work.
  • WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR BAIL SYSTEM? – The federal government enacts the criminal code. The province applies it. The province builds and owns the courts. The province hires the Judges, the Justices of the Peace, the Crown Attorneys and court staff.
The ReeveLaw Blog, Proudly powered by WordPress.