Friday, October 31, 2008

Reducing convictions

›
If juror ignorance about the meaning of "beyond reasonable doubt" had the effect of causing too many acquittals, you can be sure s...
Sunday, October 26, 2008

Over-zealous handcuffing

›
One of the limitations of only looking at the decisions of the senior appellate courts is that sometimes first instance decisions that perfe...
Saturday, October 25, 2008

On mixed statements

›
The Supreme Court of Canada has simplified the direction that judges are to give juries on mixed statements. These are statements by an accu...
Thursday, October 23, 2008

Fantasy and invention

›
In discussing recent invention (see blog for 8 July 2008 concerning R v Barlien , and the further comment on 19 July 2008), I suggested that...

Our fair-minded feminine side

›
Barristers, being fair-minded observers of the judiciary, are constantly amazed at how fair-minded judges are. (I smirk, but then I often sm...
Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Too much information

›
Anyone who thinks criminal cases are really just civil cases but with a higher standard of proof as to the ultimate issue will not be surpri...
Sunday, October 19, 2008

Our ethos is different from yours

›
In a decision that very nearly passed me by – because of its civil nature – the Supreme Court of Canada has held that the civil standard of ...
Friday, October 10, 2008

Risk of unfairness: is the criminal standard of proof applicable?

›
On a day when I am feeling particularly smug , I am not going to spoil my mood by risking being in contempt of court. So my comments on Soli...
Friday, October 03, 2008

Reviewing judge alone verdicts

›
In two decisions yesterday, the second of which applied the first, the Supreme Court of Canada explained when the reasons for verdict at a j...
Sunday, September 28, 2008

Judges as scholars

›
Who are top of the heap, judges or academics? Should academics be allowed to slap down judges for their indulgence in scholarship when they ...
Friday, September 26, 2008

How much have you got?

›
The presumption of innocence refers to two things: the burden of proof and the standard of proof. It means that the burden of proof is on th...
Friday, September 12, 2008

More on standards of proof of preliminary facts

›
In Canada it is necessary that compliance with procedures for interviewing young people be established beyond reasonable doubt: R v LTH [20...
Thursday, September 11, 2008

I'm bad, I'm bad!

›
“I am so bad that you can't rely on my confession”: like the Cretan liar, the accused in R v Bonisteel [2008] BCCA 344 (9 September 200...
Thursday, September 04, 2008

Business as usual

›
Like everyone else, I spend much of my time looking out the window. Except for blind people of course. And those in cells without views. My ...
Thursday, August 28, 2008

A slave to the law

›
When mens rea requires intention, problems may arise from ignorance of the law being no excuse. This has been illustrated in drug possession...
Sunday, August 24, 2008

Now we are four!

›
Good grief, was that four years of blogging? Just an amusing hobby.
Monday, August 04, 2008

Appellant accuses counsel

›
In Muirhead v R (Jamaica) [2008] UKPC 39 (28 July 2008) the Privy Council allowed an appeal against conviction for murder because of fundam...
Friday, August 01, 2008

Pensees d'escalier

›
An illustration of how the principle of finality in litigation can prevent a superior court of record from correcting its errors after the n...
Thursday, July 31, 2008

Enticed co-operation and its rewards

›
When does giving a defendant information as to the possible consequences of his co-operation with the prosecution amount to an abuse of proc...
Tuesday, July 29, 2008

Appeals on moot questions

›
It is a relief to see that the Supreme Court did not need to refer again to the balance of probabilities (see last blog) when it granted lea...
Friday, July 25, 2008

Proof and consequences

›
Cynical barristers – few though they may be – probably think that judges fudge the standard of proof so that they can decide issues as they ...