Criminal Defence Law Blog
It seems that a lot of people have difficulty understanding the concept of what consent is and what it is not, in terms of sexual activity. If you’re not sure, you should read this.
Ahead of the biggest drunken party night of the year, Samantha Gold takes a look at Canada’s consent laws
This article does a pretty good job of laying out the sex crimes landscape in Canada however there are 3 comments to make. 1. The age of consent is 16 however if you’re paying for or providing compensation for the sexual activity the age of consent rises to 18 years old. Beware of this quirk. 2. Although prostitution is not illegal, communicating with someone (even electronically) for the purpose of prostitution is. Beware of this quirk. 3. In law a complainant is not a victim until a crime has been proven. That’s why we use the terminology we do.
n the wake of Graham James’ release from prison, Legal Columnist Samantha Gold takes a look at Canada’s sex crime laws involving minors
Source: Canada’s Laws and Penalties for Sex Crimes Against Kids – Forget The Box
The 2015 Martin’s annotated criminal code and related statutes runs 2,079 pages. The 2015 supplement of amendments adds 87 more pages. It is amended and added to numerous times each year. It is riddled with “outdated, unenforceable and unconstitutional” laws. It has become so complex and confusing it is difficult, even for experts, to apply the law correctly, hence this judicial doozer of a mistake. I don’t know if anyone alive remembers the last time it was overhauled and cleaned up.
As legal goofs go, Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Denny Thomas’s verdict in the Travis Vader murder trial for the slaying of vanished-without-a-trace retired couple Lyle and Marie McCann was a doozy. That’s not only because Justice Thomas’s second-degree murder conviction relied on a long-dead provision of Canada’s Criminal Code, but also because his trial judgment, the first ever live-streamed from an Alberta courtroom, was ballyhooed as a signal judiciary-media compromise in the campaign to put cameras in courtrooms.
This Florida Judge jailed the victim in a domestic assault case for not showing up at trial and testifying. As well as the public outrage, “The Florida Supreme Court said her (Judge) behavior was “intolerable” and gave people the impression that she was siding with the prosecution.” The Judge was reprimanded and has to take sensitivity courses. Likewise in Ontario neither the Attorney General nor Judges wish to be seen as victimizing a victim.
Earlier this month, the Florida Supreme Court publicly scolded an Orlando judge for more than six minutes straight for the way she handled a domestic violence case last year. Judge Jerri Collins was overseeing a domestic violence trial when a victim failed to appear and testify. After the trial was completed, Collins called the victim back into the courtroom, this time to hold her for contempt of court. The victim pleaded with the judge that she could not go to jail because she had a 1 year old son to care for. She said that she had not
Source: Florida Judge Scolded for Jailing Domestic Violence Victim
FENTANYL ADDICTION: I’ve written about this a few times as the plague of fentanyl addiction sweeps the nation. This is Kati’s story. “Well, at first it was fun, right? It was just for fun,” As she talks, the blood starts to seep through her makeup. I try not to stare at the red stain growing on her chin. Kati has lost everything thanks to her addiction to fentanyl. The best Kati can hope for is to wake up after her next fix of fentanyl.
Kati Mather thought it would be fun to try fentanyl as a party drug. After 11 overdoses, the 22-year-old lives life one day at a time, wondering if she’ll wake up tomorrow.
Source: The new face of fentanyl addiction: Kati’s story – British Columbia – CBC News
Be careful of what you say. An admission of a an act that amounts to any form of illegal drug possession, even though never charged, is grounds for inadmissibility.
What’s the advice from a Canadian who admitted at the border to using marijuana before he was legally prescribed the drug? Just deny it, even if you’re entering a U.S. state where recreational and medical use of pot is also legal.
NUANCES OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE – Want to be your own lawyer? Would you have objected to this? The Crown asked the accused what was his theory of what happened. This is objectionable because the question suggests that the accused has an obligation to provide a satisfactory theory or should be found guilty in the failure to do so, which undermines the presumption of innocence. A good trial lawyer will protect you from such improper questions and inferences. R. v. Dhaliwal
Source: CanLII – 2016 ONCA 652 (CanLII)
The website for finding and rating attorneys
Source: Dennis Reeve – 4 Attorney Reviews & Ratings – LawyerRatingz.com
This is just another example of someone who fundamentally misunderstands the purpose and functioning of the criminal justice system and as a result has unrealistic expectations of the process. “There is a common misperception that the Crown is the victim’s lawyer. Not so. The Crown represents the public interest and his or job is to present the evidence fairly.” “If she had, (understood) she would have sought the help she needed rather than getting the authorities involved.”
Despite the successful trial, Shannon Graham said the two-year journey through the legal process has been punishing and she was treated ‘like a piece of evidence’
