Podcast
Questions and Answers
An accused can argue that they lacked the necessary criminal intent, disputing the actus reus.
An accused can argue that they lacked the necessary criminal intent, disputing the actus reus.
False (B)
An alibi should be supplied early to allow for proper investigation by police and crown.
An alibi should be supplied early to allow for proper investigation by police and crown.
True (A)
The accused must always testify in a criminal proceeding.
The accused must always testify in a criminal proceeding.
False (B)
The Maracle case involved an accused who claimed to have been at a public event at the time of the crime.
The Maracle case involved an accused who claimed to have been at a public event at the time of the crime.
The Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to substantial errors affecting the appellant's alibi defence.
The Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to substantial errors affecting the appellant's alibi defence.
Justice Glithero's decision allows Maracle to serve his sentence indefinitely as a dangerous offender.
Justice Glithero's decision allows Maracle to serve his sentence indefinitely as a dangerous offender.
The trial judge emphasized that the timing of the alibi's disclosure was crucial for an effective investigation.
The trial judge emphasized that the timing of the alibi's disclosure was crucial for an effective investigation.
Justice Glithero relied primarily on a psychiatric assessment by Dr. Stephen Harper in his decision.
Justice Glithero relied primarily on a psychiatric assessment by Dr. Stephen Harper in his decision.
Larry Sinclair argued that the speeding physician should have been stopped due to the potential of causing an accident.
Larry Sinclair argued that the speeding physician should have been stopped due to the potential of causing an accident.
The ticket issued to Dr. Kutryk was ultimately upheld by the court.
The ticket issued to Dr. Kutryk was ultimately upheld by the court.
Dudley and Stephens' legal defense of necessity was accepted by the court.
Dudley and Stephens' legal defense of necessity was accepted by the court.
Dudley and Stephens argued that the boy they killed had a lesser value than their own lives.
Dudley and Stephens argued that the boy they killed had a lesser value than their own lives.
Brooks was charged with murder for his involvement in the case.
Brooks was charged with murder for his involvement in the case.
The defense of duress can be used for any crime regardless of circumstances.
The defense of duress can be used for any crime regardless of circumstances.
In the case of R.v.Ruzic, the defendant argued that the requirement for the threatener to be present was unconstitutional.
In the case of R.v.Ruzic, the defendant argued that the requirement for the threatener to be present was unconstitutional.
The common law defense of duress is narrower than the statutory defense of compulsion.
The common law defense of duress is narrower than the statutory defense of compulsion.
Ruzic's case involved threats that included physical harm to her mother.
Ruzic's case involved threats that included physical harm to her mother.
The Keller decision is still considered good law after the Ruzic ruling.
The Keller decision is still considered good law after the Ruzic ruling.
Graveline acted in a state of automatism that was triggered by her traumatic relationship with her husband before the shooting occurred.
Graveline acted in a state of automatism that was triggered by her traumatic relationship with her husband before the shooting occurred.
The Crown argued that Graveline's amnesia was genuine but suggested that it happened before the shooting.
The Crown argued that Graveline's amnesia was genuine but suggested that it happened before the shooting.
Counselling to commit murder requires that the act actually occurs for an individual to be convicted.
Counselling to commit murder requires that the act actually occurs for an individual to be convicted.
Doucet chose to argue self-defence because she was not living with her husband at the time.
Doucet chose to argue self-defence because she was not living with her husband at the time.
The Supreme Court decided to stay the proceedings because it would not be fair to put Doucet through another trial.
The Supreme Court decided to stay the proceedings because it would not be fair to put Doucet through another trial.
In self-defence, a person can use excessive force without consequence as long as they feel threatened.
In self-defence, a person can use excessive force without consequence as long as they feel threatened.
Paice's actions were justified under self-defence because he was under threat at the moment of his attack.
Paice's actions were justified under self-defence because he was under threat at the moment of his attack.
The defence of necessity applies only in circumstances of non-imminent risks.
The defence of necessity applies only in circumstances of non-imminent risks.
Doucet's actions could have been viewed as aiding and abetting an offence under S.2A.
Doucet's actions could have been viewed as aiding and abetting an offence under S.2A.
Ungar was charged with dangerous driving due to his high-speed maneuvers in traffic.
Ungar was charged with dangerous driving due to his high-speed maneuvers in traffic.
The trial judge supported the Crown's argument that Ungar had reasonable legal alternatives to his actions.
The trial judge supported the Crown's argument that Ungar had reasonable legal alternatives to his actions.
Each second of delay in Ungar's case could mean the difference between life and death.
Each second of delay in Ungar's case could mean the difference between life and death.
Section 465 of the legal code relates to conspiracy and does not apply when no agreement is made to commit a crime.
Section 465 of the legal code relates to conspiracy and does not apply when no agreement is made to commit a crime.
The concept of provocation applies if there is no wrongful insult intended.
The concept of provocation applies if there is no wrongful insult intended.
Doucet solicited a hitman who was actually an undercover officer.
Doucet solicited a hitman who was actually an undercover officer.
If Marace fully participated in significant counseling and rehabilitation efforts, he had a reasonable chance of rehabilitation.
If Marace fully participated in significant counseling and rehabilitation efforts, he had a reasonable chance of rehabilitation.
Non-insane automatism is linked to internal factors such as mental illness.
Non-insane automatism is linked to internal factors such as mental illness.
The burden of proof for non-insane automatism is on the accused.
The burden of proof for non-insane automatism is on the accused.
Insane automatism can be described as not criminally responsible due to a mental disorder.
Insane automatism can be described as not criminally responsible due to a mental disorder.
If an accused is found to be unfit to stand trial, the trial can proceed after a brief evaluation.
If an accused is found to be unfit to stand trial, the trial can proceed after a brief evaluation.
The verdict for an individual found to have a 'disease of the mind' at the time of the offense is typically guilty.
The verdict for an individual found to have a 'disease of the mind' at the time of the offense is typically guilty.
Intoxication can be used as a defense for general intent offenses.
Intoxication can be used as a defense for general intent offenses.
A person may still be found guilty of manslaughter if acquitted of murder due to intoxication.
A person may still be found guilty of manslaughter if acquitted of murder due to intoxication.
Justice Sopinka suggested that society should not punish individuals who become intoxicated voluntarily.
Justice Sopinka suggested that society should not punish individuals who become intoxicated voluntarily.
The Carter defense allowed accused individuals to challenge breathalyzer tests based on their drinking history.
The Carter defense allowed accused individuals to challenge breathalyzer tests based on their drinking history.
The July, 2008 Criminal Code Amendments completely abolished the use of breathalyzer tests in court.
The July, 2008 Criminal Code Amendments completely abolished the use of breathalyzer tests in court.
Battered Woman Syndrome was recognized as a legal defense after the case of R.v.Lavallee.
Battered Woman Syndrome was recognized as a legal defense after the case of R.v.Lavallee.
Graveline chose to argue non-insane automatism instead of Battered Woman Syndrome because she did not want to incorporate self-defense in her argument.
Graveline chose to argue non-insane automatism instead of Battered Woman Syndrome because she did not want to incorporate self-defense in her argument.
An individual found unfit to stand trial may remain in a psychiatric hospital until deemed fit.
An individual found unfit to stand trial may remain in a psychiatric hospital until deemed fit.
Daviault was found not guilty of murder due to evidence that he did not have the intent to commit the crime while intoxicated.
Daviault was found not guilty of murder due to evidence that he did not have the intent to commit the crime while intoxicated.
Flashcards
Alibi Defence
Alibi Defence
An argument that the accused was not present at the crime scene.
Alibi Witness
Alibi Witness
A witness, other than the accused, who can corroborate the alibi.
Prompt Disclosure of Alibi
Prompt Disclosure of Alibi
The accused must disclose their alibi to the Crown and police early in the process for a fair investigation.
Late Alibi Disclosure
Late Alibi Disclosure
Signup and view all the flashcards
Denying Actus Reus
Denying Actus Reus
Signup and view all the flashcards
Disputing Mens Rea
Disputing Mens Rea
Signup and view all the flashcards
Valid Excuse Defence
Valid Excuse Defence
Signup and view all the flashcards
Dangerous Offender
Dangerous Offender
Signup and view all the flashcards
Necessity Defense
Necessity Defense
Signup and view all the flashcards
Measuring Human Value
Measuring Human Value
Signup and view all the flashcards
Duress
Duress
Signup and view all the flashcards
Compulsion
Compulsion
Signup and view all the flashcards
Common Law Duress
Common Law Duress
Signup and view all the flashcards
Law and Morality
Law and Morality
Signup and view all the flashcards
Dilemma
Dilemma
Signup and view all the flashcards
Necessity Defense Failure
Necessity Defense Failure
Signup and view all the flashcards
Accessory to a Crime
Accessory to a Crime
Signup and view all the flashcards
Drawing Lots
Drawing Lots
Signup and view all the flashcards
What is automatism?
What is automatism?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What is non-insane automatism?
What is non-insane automatism?
Signup and view all the flashcards
Does non-insane automatism present a recurring danger?
Does non-insane automatism present a recurring danger?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What are some causes of non-insane automatism?
What are some causes of non-insane automatism?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What is insane automatism?
What is insane automatism?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What is insane automatism called in the Criminal Code?
What is insane automatism called in the Criminal Code?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What are the conditions for being found Not Criminally Responsible (NCR)?
What are the conditions for being found Not Criminally Responsible (NCR)?
Signup and view all the flashcards
Who can raise an NCR defense?
Who can raise an NCR defense?
Signup and view all the flashcards
Who has the burden of proof in an NCR case?
Who has the burden of proof in an NCR case?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What must the courts determine before an NCR case can move forward?
What must the courts determine before an NCR case can move forward?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What three questions are considered in a fitness-to-stand-trial hearing?
What three questions are considered in a fitness-to-stand-trial hearing?
Signup and view all the flashcards
What happens if the accused is found unfit to stand trial?
What happens if the accused is found unfit to stand trial?
Signup and view all the flashcards
If an accused is found to have been suffering from a "disease of the mind" at the time of the offense, what is the verdict and what are the possible sentences?
If an accused is found to have been suffering from a "disease of the mind" at the time of the offense, what is the verdict and what are the possible sentences?
Signup and view all the flashcards
Automatism
Automatism
Signup and view all the flashcards
Amnesia after crime
Amnesia after crime
Signup and view all the flashcards
Counselling to commit murder
Counselling to commit murder
Signup and view all the flashcards
Self-defence
Self-defence
Signup and view all the flashcards
Necessity
Necessity
Signup and view all the flashcards
Provocation
Provocation
Signup and view all the flashcards
Intervener
Intervener
Signup and view all the flashcards
Stay of proceedings
Stay of proceedings
Signup and view all the flashcards
Conviction
Conviction
Signup and view all the flashcards
Attempt
Attempt
Signup and view all the flashcards
Conspiracy
Conspiracy
Signup and view all the flashcards
Not guilty
Not guilty
Signup and view all the flashcards
Mental state
Mental state
Signup and view all the flashcards
Excessive force
Excessive force
Signup and view all the flashcards
Manslaughter
Manslaughter
Signup and view all the flashcards
Murder
Murder
Signup and view all the flashcards
Study Notes
Criminal Defences - Introduction
- Accused can present three defence arguments:
- Deny the act (actus reus)
- Argue lack of intent (mens rea)
- Assert a valid excuse.
- Alibi: Should be presented early to the police and Crown. The accused doesn't have to testify but should if providing an alibi, to allow credibility assessment and cross-examination.
Maracle Case (Alibi Defence)
- Maracle's alibi: Was at home on the morning of May 26, 1997; supported by family members.
- Denied meeting/seeing the complainant before trial or attacking her.
- Ontario Court of Appeal ordered a new trial due to substantial trial errors affecting the alibi defence—particularly regarding late disclosure, which hampered investigation.
Serial Rapist Case (Sentencing)
- Justice Glithero's decision favoured Maracle over the first trial judge's decision, leading to release after the sentence instead of indefinite detention.
- Dr. Harper's psychiatric assessment concluded a reasonable chance of rehabilitation if Maracle fully participates in counselling.
Automatism (Non-Insane)
- Definition: Automatic functioning without conscious control.
- External factors: Sleepwalking, physical blows, illness (stroke, low blood sugar), severe psychological trauma.
- Burden of proof: On the accused, requiring significant evidence to support the claim.
- Outcome: Complete acquittal if accepted by the judge.
- Not recurring danger: Usually temporary/single event.
Automatism (Insane)
-
Cause: A mental disorder/disease of the mind.
-
Recurrence: Presents a recurring danger.
-
Criminal Code term: Not Criminally Responsible (NCR).
-
Criteria: Mental disorder at the time of the act and the disorder made the person incapable of appreciating the act's nature or knowing it was wrong.
-
Burden of proof: On the party presenting the defence.
-
Fitness hearing: Courts first determine if the accused is fit to stand trial.
-
Fitness criteria: (1) Understanding proceedings, (2) Understanding consequences and (3) Ability to communicate with a lawyer
-
Outcome: "Not guilty" because the individual is NCR.
-
Sentencing: Discharged or committed to a psychiatric facility for treatment if a significant public safety risk (annual review).
Intoxication and the "Carter Defence"
-
Intoxication as Defence: Applicable for "specific intent" offences, not "general intent" offences.
-
Aggravated assault is a "general intent" offence.
-
Daviault Case: Drunkenness was a factor in questioning intent; found not guilty due to reasonable doubt.
-
Defence evidence (Daviault): Pharmacologist testified that the accused may have experienced a blackout and lacked necessary intent.
-
Changes by Criminal Code: Drunkenness is generally not accepted for general intent offences..
-
Sopinka's Minority Opinion: Implies punishment for deliberate intoxication.
-
Carter Defence Change: Subsequent amendments prevented questioning breathalyzer results unless the machine's operation was faulty.
Battered Woman Syndrome
- R. v. Lavallee: Battered Woman Syndrome recognised as a legal defence.
- R. v. Graveline: Non-insane automatism defence raised instead of battered woman syndrome as there was no immediate threat (instead there was just a general feeling of danger).
- Expert concluded her automatism was due to the trauma of her relationship and preceding circumstances.
- Crown argument (Graveline): Automatism must occur before the act, not after.
- Outcome (Graveline): The automatism defence possibly applied, but did not completely succeed.
R. v. Ryan (Counselling/Aiding/Abetting)
-
Counselling: Defined as actions to "procure, solicit, or incite."
-
Conviction: Guilty of counselling due to inciting or soliciting. Various other charges can be considered too.
-
Intervention: Third parties with specific interests, like women's rights groups.
-
Alternative Defence (Ryan): The accused was not living with her abuser so the defence of battered woman syndrome, in this case, might be unavailable or at least difficult to prove since the threat is not seen as imminent
Self-Defence
-
Justification: Used when imminent danger exists and no other possible, safe choice exists. The accused must reasonably perceive the danger.
-
Force Usage: Must be necessary and not intended to cause death or serious injury.
-
Justification for killing in self-defence: Requires a reasonable belief that one's life is in immediate danger.
-
Examples (Smith & Paice): In both cases, the accused employed excessive force. This is not applicable in these instances.
Necessity
- Elements: Applicable in imminent and urgent circumstances where no other choice exists or the purpose of the act is to prevent a greater harm.
- Cases:
- Ungar (p. 277): Defence of necessity accepted given the life-threatening situation. Crown argued there were alternatives.
- Traffic Cop & Kutryk: Illustrates how necessity might be an approach to a legal interpretation problem.
The Queen v. Dudley and Stephens
-
Case: Necessity defence rejected; it's not a question of lesser harm, but of justifiable killing of a human being.
-
Comparison: Difficult to measure the value of human life, as was the case. This may have been decided differently if a fair chance to live were guaranteed to each of the men, or if they had instead drawn lots.
-
Role of Morality: Law and morality are not the same; not all immoral acts are unlawful.
Duress
-
When applicable: Committing an offence due to immediate threats of death or injury from another person. The threatener must be present.
-
Examples:
- Keller: Defence of duress failed because the threat was not present at the time of the crime.
-
R. v. Ruzic: The Canadian Supreme Court made the defence of duress or compulsion broader..
Studying That Suits You
Use AI to generate personalized quizzes and flashcards to suit your learning preferences.
Description
Explore the introduction to criminal defences, focusing on key arguments such as denying the act, lack of intent, and valid excuses. Delve into specific cases like Maracle's alibi defence and the implications of trial errors in the justice system.
