Case Law Review

• Using TPS-IT resources for personal, commercial, financial gain, or political causes is prohibited.

Systems Auditing and Monitoring

• TPS reserves the right to access system information without prior notice.
• This access includes all information and data stored or communicated through TPS-IT resources for lawful purposes.
• Purposes include facilitating work in a member's absence, routine technical administration, auditing, investigating improper use, and complying with legal obligations.
• Members using TPS-IT resources for personal use accept TPS's right of access and have no expectation of privacy.

Definitions

• Authorized User: Individuals with access to Toronto Police Service IT resources (permanent members, contractors, volunteers, temporary members, consultants, third-party personnel).
• Workplace Technology Device (WTD): Any computing end-user device with its own operating system that can connect to a network (workstations, mobile devices, photocopiers/scanners, laptops/notebooks/tablets, monitors, fax machines, MWS, external media storage devices, printers, telephones, voice mail, handheld ticketing devices).
• Information supplied Technology (IT) Resource: Any system, service, hardware, and network resources owned by or provided to authorized users by the Toronto Police Service (networks, network devices, communication/business applications, software, WTDs, internet access).
• Confidential Information: All police information for official business use only (privileged information, third-party information, personal information, any information collected/obtained/derived from TPS records under privacy laws).
• Personal Devices and Technology: Any telecommunication equipment and technology not issued or authorized by the Service.

Case Law Review

R v. Grant 2009 SCC – Investigative Detention and RTC

• Summary: Mr. Grant was approached by police, questioned, and eventually admitted to carrying a gun.
• The Supreme Court found Mr. Grant had been arbitrarily detained, violating s 9 of the Charter.
• His right to speak to a lawyer was also breached, violating s 10(b).
• The gun was admitted as evidence, and Mr. Grant's appeal was dismissed.
• The SCC examined the moment of Mr. Grant's detention, which triggered Charter rights.
• Mr. Grant argued detention began when told to keep his hands in front of him, and the SCC agreed.
• Detention includes police intrusion on physical or psychological liberty.
• Psychological detention occurs when someone feels legally obliged or reasonably believes they cannot leave.
• Courts consider the individual's perception of circumstances, police conduct, and the individual's characteristics.
• Normal police interactions do not automatically cause psychological detention.
• A detention is only justifiable with reasonable and probable grounds for criminal activity.
• Arbitrary detention violates section 9 of the Charter.
• Those detained have the right to counsel.
• Mr. Grant was denied the right to counsel after being psychologically detained.
• Section 24(2) of the Charter prevents use of evidence that would bring the administration of justice into disrepute.
• Courts consider the seriousness of the state conduct, impact on the accused's Charter interests, and society's interest in adjudication.
• Despite Charter violations, the officers acted in "good faith" without specifically targeting Mr. Grant.
• The gun was highly reliable physical evidence and essential to Mr. Grant's subsequent conviction.

R v. Jordan 2016 SCC – Right to Be Tried Within a Reasonable Time, 11(b)

• Supreme Court of Canada established a new framework for deciding which delays to trial are reasonable.
• Jordan's case involved drug offenses and waiting over four years for trial.
• The Supreme Court dismissed Mr. Jordan's charges due to unreasonable delay.
• Criminal trials should be completed or have an expected completion date within 18 months in provincial court or 30 months in superior courts.
• Aims to address and fix the "culture of complacency" and unnecessary trial procedures, inefficient practices, and lack of institutional resources.
• The defence lawyers, prosecutors and the courts share their onus to avoid delay.
• If unreasonable delay, the remedy is a judicial stay of proceedings, which ends prosecution and removes outcomes from the charges.
• The "clock" starts when an accused is charged.
• Delays over the time limit will result in the charges being stayed.
• However, the Crown can establish that the delay is reasonable because of exceptional circumstances or unexpected complexity.

R v. Prosper 1994 SCC – Implementational Duty of RTC

• Investigators must inform suspects of their Charter right to legal counsel and silence
• Additional legal duty to provide suspects with a "Prosper warning" before questioning when a suspect asserts their right to counsel and then later changes their mind after efforts to contact counsel have been unsuccessful.
• Police are required to explicitly inform the detainee (again) of their right to a reasonable opportunity to contact counsel and of the police duty to hold off their questioning.
• You have the right to remain silent.
• You have the right to a reasonable opportunity to consult legal counsel and you initially indicated that you wished to do so. However, you are now indicating that you do not wish to speak to a lawyer.
• Because you have changed your mind, I have a duty to advise you again that you have the right to speak to a lawyer, and that I will give you another opportunity to do so if you wish.
• Until you are certain about whether or not you wish to speak with a lawyer, I am legally obligated not to attempt to take any statement from you or to ask you to participate in any investigative process that could result in you providing incriminating evidence to me.
• Do you understand?
• What would you like to do?
• The Prosper warning ensures individuals frustrated in exercising their to right counsel do not give up.

R v. Stinchcombe 1991 SCC - Disclosure Obligations

• The Crown has a legal duty to disclose all relevant information to the defence.
• Investigation is for justice, not securing conviction.
• Judge reviews timing and relevance of information.
• Information should not be withheld if there is reasonable possibility this will impair making full answer and defence.
• Accused counsel must bring failure to comply to judge ASAP.
• Initial disclosure is needed before electing mode of trial or plead.
• There is a duty to disclose all relevant information whether exculpatory or inculpatory.
• The Crown has discretion on timing and relevance of information.