June 11

Law 30: Case Study Comparisons 2019

You’ve been reviewing two criminal cases related to offenders in Alberta and Saskatchewan. It’s one thing to study and understand a single criminal trial and outcome, but to make comparisons to another requires more complex thinking and analysis of the facts.

You’ll have another whole class to review both cases and what information you have related to each. Tomorrow, you’ll have an open-book exam testing your understanding of the cases themselves but also your legal understanding of elements of Criminal Law.

Below are a list of factors to consider in your review of both cases:

  • the defendant’s personal backgrounds
  • their support system – family, friends, secure social environment
  • health and wellness of the defendant at the time of the crime – anything to impair decision-making?
  • others involved in the crime – a principal offender, others aiding/abetting putting pressure on defendant
  • elements of the criminal act(s):
    • voluntary actions taken by the defendant that are considered a criminal offence
    • any inaction of the defendant that constitutes failure of duty
    • types of criminal offences they were charged with and/or actually convicted of
    • proof of their actus reus (guilty act) and mens rea (guilty mind) for each offence
      • remember, prosecution needs to prove guilty act and guilty mind occurring together for each offence
    • difference between the sentence of a conviction via the Youth Criminal Justice Act versus the adult sentence of the Criminal Code
    • what evidence or elements of the crime would/could a prosecutor focus on to prove and support the defendant’s level guilt in the crime?
    • What evidence or elements of the crime would/could a defence lawyer focus on to prove and support their client’s innocence in the crime?
  • What similarities can you identify of their offences and trial outcomes?
  • What differences can you identify of their offences and trial outcomes?
  • Consider why Paul’s offences seemed similar in circumstance to Briscoe’s but her charges were reduced to manslaughter and unlawful confinement.
  • Consider the phsyical involvement of both Briscoe and Paul in their offences.

Good luck!

Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
June 4

11 Elements of Criminal Offence

For someone to be found guilty of a crime, you must prove two parts of the offence: guilty act and guilty mind.

Guilty Act:

  • Beyond a Reasonable Doubt – it doesn’t need to be 100% certainty of guilt to find someone guilty.

Standard of Proof.png

Murder, Manslaughter, Criminal Negligence: What’s the Difference? (article)

Criminal Negligence Cases:


Criminal Offences – Recent Articles


Case Study on Willful Blindness – one of the tests of mens rea:

Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
May 27

Law 30 Criminal Law – intro

We’ve discussed how Criminal Law is unique among the other categories of Law in Canada. In this section, we’ll start looking at the specifics of it.

Some of the Big Ideas you should focus on in this section include:Image result for criminal law canada

  • What constitutes a crime or how it is different from what is illegal.
  • How criminal law events can still overlap/be related to civil law cases.
  • The concept of “protection of society” even though a criminal offence usually has specific victims.
  • What two parts of any crime are explained within the Criminal Code itself?

Criminal Code of Canada sites:


Civil Suits That Followed Criminal Ones:

Types of Criminal Charges:

Cases to evaluate:


Hybrid Offence Case Study – Section 267 Criminal Code: Assault Causing Bodily Harm


Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
May 15

Law 30 9.0 Criminal Law – news articles connections

Starting the Criminal Law Unit next, we’ll read through several news articles of events that have a connection to legal rights. You will have a Socrative quiz open to add your initial reactions anonymously and build from those comments added.

News Articles With Legal Connections:

  1. Tethered girl awarded damages in BC
  2. Delta motorcyclist impaired before crash with Mountie
  3. Calgary parents acquitted of manslaughter in death of daughter
  4. B.C. gay basher gets 17 months sentence
  5. Police can’t block Facebook rape images
  6. Canadian soldier pleads not guilty in Afghan death
  7. Manslaughter charge laid in Winnipeg
  8. Montreal police investigating possible hate crime
Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
April 29

Law 30 08.1 The Charter – Summaries & Cases

To understand the rights and freedoms developed within the Charter document, you’ll read through an explanation of each important section, summarize the important parts of it, and summarize a Charter case related to that section.

The Canadian Charter of Rights is more than three decades old already and our understanding and application of its rights and freedoms have been interpreted in many ways by significant legal cases and challenges.

It is one of the most widely misunderstood elements of our political and legal system in Canada, though, so it’s is important to get a clear/correct understanding of what it offers and doesn’t offer Canadians. 

2.1 Introduction: Summary of the Charter overall

2.2 a Reasonable Limits and Notwithstanding Clause: Summaries of each

Reasonable Limits

Notwithstanding Clause


2.2 b R. v. Oakes 1986 Summary and Significance

2.2 c Notwithstanding Clause Uses: list the times governments have implemented this clause. (Remember, this clause was added at the last minute to satisfy provincial leaders’ concerns, to ensure Federal government and courts didn’t hold too much power over provinces.)

2.3 Fundamental Freedoms: 

a. Freedom of Conscience and Religion: Summary and Case summaries

b. Freedom of Thought, Belief, Opinion, and Expression: Summary and Case summaries

c. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly: Summary and Case summaries

d. Freedom of Association: Summary and Case summaries


2.4 Democratic and Mobility Rights: Summary and Case summaries

Democratic Rights

Mobility Rights

2.5 Legal Rights: Summaries and Case Summaries

a. Life, Liberty, and Security of the Person

b. Search and Seizure Laws

c. Detention and Arrest

d. Rights on Being Charged with an Offence

e. Cruel and Unusual Treatment or Punishment

f. Self-incrimination and Interpreter Rights


Cases to consider: reasonable limitations of a right – precedent set cases

  • Law Society of British Columbia v. Trinity Western University and Trinity Western University v. Law Society of Upper Canada
    A Christian law school wanted to prohibit students who practiced homosexuality. Their status as a school of law was challenged because they were violating Charter rights.
  • Frank v. Canada (Attorney General)
    Federal election laws prohibit someone from voting if they’ve lived outside of Canada for 5 years. The law was challenged and found to violate Charter rights.
  • R. v. Mills (2019)
    A man contacted a 14 yr old girl and had communications with her, telling her he was 23 though he was 32. He didn’t realize it was police behind the account and they collected data from the conversations. He asked to meet the “pretend” girl and when arriving was arrested for child luring. He argued police violated his right to expectation of privacy by creating the account and collecting copies of it. The judge disagreed saying there’s no expectation of privacy in conversations with a child you do not know online. Sets precedent related to right of privacy through digital communications.
  • R. v. Bird (2019)
    A man with over 60 convictions was deemed a high risk to reoffend, so after being released from prison new conditions were placed on him. He wasn’t allowed to return to his home community, where he was thought to be a danger, and instead ordered to stay at a halfway house in Regina. He initially stayed there, but eventually just left it without permission, violating the terms of his release. He claimed the restrictions on his release violated his rights to liberty (freedom). The courts decided it was a reasonable limitation on his right to liberty, because Parliament (through laws) allowed for ways of an offender to challenge a similar order, rather than simply violate it.
  • R. v. Calnen (2019)
    A man was questioned in the murder of his partner. He eventually admitted she’d died after an argument/altercation with him, but he was doing drugs so was scared to inform police. An accidental murder is a manslaughter charge, but investigations found several efforts on his part to hide his crime – moving the body, burning parts and relocating it several times, etc. These additional efforts to hide the details of the crime can now legally be used to infer/as evidence of intent meaning it raises the possible criminal charge from manslaughter to second degree murder. Precedent setting that behaviour after a crime can be used to determine intention of the crime before the act.
  • R. v Jones (2017)
    A man exchanged text messages with someone about firearms and drug exchanges. Part of the evidence used against him were the text messages obtained by a production order (warrant of sorts). He claimed his right to privacy was violated and argued for that evidence to be excluded. Court case determined text message data is kept by a telecommunications company and can be legally compelled to provide that data. His right was not violated because the message data was lawfully obtained.
  • R. v. Reeves (2018)
    A man was convicted of possession of child pornography, but he/his lawyer challenged that the evidence was unlawfully obtained. Police approached the home and the man’s wife who he lived with let them into the home and let them collect the computer. Police kept the pc for 4 months before obtaining a warrant to search it, on which they found a large collection of child pornography images and files. In appeal, though, the courts agreed that a 3rd party cannot give consent to a search, so it was a charter violation of the man’s rights. The conviction and appeal that upheld it were overruled.


Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
April 16

Law 30 08.1 The Charter – Summaries & Cases

Looking at the different sections of the Charter, use either the Text for support or online sources to develop a clear summary of the rights/freedoms protected within each of the sections as well as a collection of Cases that have been tried in the court system to test the limits of each section.

Textbook Chapter – pdf – it’s been emailed to you through your Sunwest email

Websites useful in Charter Case Studies:


Extension Questions: Questions we have from our discussionImage result for discussion icon png

  1. The court is meant to balance against government abusing power to create new legislation. What if the courts aren’t balanced either ideologically and decisions are made leaning towards whoever was able to add judges to the bench?


Question to answer in your Comment: What understanding do you have now of Canada’s Supreme Court make up and whether it could be used by a government to predict decisions, as it often is in the States. In your opinion, can we trust the balance the courts offer against government power?

April 9

Law 30 07 Changing the Constitution – The Why

As Canada developed further as a country, it grew in population and diversity. Eventually, it was believed that protections needed to be included in the Constitution level of law to protect that diversity – thus the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Resources to Support Learning for This Section:

Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
April 5

07 Protections from Judicial Pressure – Documentary

The general public likely has nothing to fear within the judicial system, but it would be naive to believe only guilty people are convicted of crimes. There are many examples of individuals found guilty of serious offences, including murder, serving a number of years in prison, only later to be exonerated and their convictions erased, because of new evidence revealed. Andy Rose is one such individual.

“Someone Got Away With Murder” Fifth Estate Documentary – how far can police go in pressuring a suspect to gain evidence to use against them in a trial? And at what cost?

Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 27

Law 30 05 Fiduciary Duty to First Nations

Another important part of understanding the laws of Canada related to its early beginnings is to understand the unique relationship government has with our third cultural component – the First Nations people that lived on the land that became part of Canada.

Because King George III initially promised to deal with the Aboriginal groups in the newly developing land as a sovereign nation, still today any decision made within Canada must consider whether it impacts First Nations rights and then has a responsibility to consult. It arises in the news often, including some recent events you may have heard of, like:

Gitdumt'en Under Siege

SHARE WIDELY – Wet'suwet'en territory is under siege by RCMP tactical forces, who are working with TransCanada to force a pipeline through our territory. Yesterday Gitdumt'en people and supporters were forcibly removed from our homelands for upholding our Wet'suwet'en laws. Militarized police confronted unarmed Indigenous people with assault and sniper rifles and made 14 arrests. As of now, Gitdumt'en Clan spokesperson Molly Wickham remains in state custody along with several others.We have never signed treaties with Canada or given up our rights and title to these lands. Canada is violating Anuk Nu'at'en (Wet'suwet'en law), it's own colonial laws, and UNDRIP. The violent separation of our people and our lands is no different today than it was 150 years ago.We fear for our neighbours at Unist'ot'en Camp who now face a similar prospect of state violence.Today there are international solidarity actions with the Wet'suwet'en. Attend one near you: https://www.facebook.com/events/2225649537692362/For ways to support: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=225163691762758&id=212798726332588To donate: https://www.gofundme.com/gitdumt039en-access-point#WETSUWETENSTRONG #NOTRESPASS #WEDZINKWA #NOPIPELINESNo use of footage without consent. Direct media enquires to michaeltoledano@gmail.com

Posted by Wet'suwet'en Access Point on Gidumt'en Territory on Tuesday, January 8, 2019

You have several questions to research and find responses to. To help some (who’ve missed some classes) to catch up, here are links you could reference.

  1. Summarize the Indian Act and its main points.
  2. What was the purpose/intent of the Indian Act? Who contributed to developing it?
  3. What is the fiduciary responsibility of Canada to the Aboriginal peoples who lived in the territories Canada assumed control of? What does it mean in terms of decisions made regarding First Nations in Canada?
  4. Explain the meaning of the government’s responsibility to “consult and inform” First Nations people. What types of issues did the Federal government have a “duty to consult” them on?
  5. Identify and summarize two specific events of Canadian history where conflict arose regarding whether consultation and informing between the government and First Nations people happened properly.
  6. How did the Natural Resources Transfer Agreement (1930) have an impact on First Nations people of Canada?
  7. What was unique about the First Nations people of Newfoundland and Labrador once those provinces joined Confederation? How was this resolved, ultimately?
  8. Identify the purpose or complaint in the R. v. Geurin (1984) Supreme Court Case and the resulting judgement. How has it continued to impact First Nations of Canada?
  9. Identify the purpose or complaint in Sparrow v. The Queen (1990) court case and the resulting judgement. How has it continued to impact First Nations of Canada?
  10. What year and under what circumstances could First Nations people first vote in a Canadian election?
  11. There have been many criticisms of the Indian Act over the decades since its development. Identify and explain three of them.
  12. Select and summarize any two recent events involving First Nations groups or communities that connect back to the relationship established with them as a sovereign nation in Canada at Confederation. Include a personal conclusion of how each event has had an additional impact on Canadian development as a whole.


Some positive things are changing with the Canadian government’s relationship with Aboriginal groups in Canada. They’re involved in great economic partnerships and contributing billions of dollars into Canada’s economy. Some of the boil-water advisories in FN communities have been resolved and the rest are expected to be completed by 2021. There is a long way to go, though.

Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT
March 21

Law 30 04 Roots of a Pluralistic Society

Canada’s beginnings were the result of struggles between three founding cultures: the French, First Nations, and British. One of the main ideas of this section is understanding the cause and effect of Quebec becoming a distinct province within Canadian Confederation. To this day, culture and the idea of “being Canadian” is practiced differently (with some limitations) within the province of Quebec.

Recent Event Examples of Quebec Interaction with the Country:


Supporting Resources:




Animated map showing the border changes in North America from 1750–2008 via over 70 slides
By EsemonoOwn work, Public Domain, Link


Canada – a union of four provinces by BNA Act 1867


Category: Law 30 | LEAVE A COMMENT