FSC 360 final
Ratushy Self Defence Review
Started by R.v. Lavallee (battered woman syndrome case). Reviewed cases where women may have killed in self defence. 3 pardons, 3 remissions, 1 appeal (no woman left prison)
Kauffman Inquiry
Started by Guy Paul Morin case. Hair and fibre analysis was valueless. Tunnel vision (clarinet thing with police), unreliable jailhouse informants.
Guy Paul Morin case
Trial 1: necklace hair was a "match", hair in his car "matched" Christine's, fibres in car, jailhouse informants. Acquited
Trial 2: witnesses gave circumstansial evidence that Morin was mean to Christine. Convicted
10 years later was exonerated with DNA evidence (semen)
Thomas Sophonow
16yo strangled in shop, confrontation with suspect on bridge. Sophonow had cowboy hat on. Convicted even though he had alibi at the time of death.
Corey Inquiry
Started by Sophonow case: in live line ups, it should be a double blind procedure (officer should give no info to witness) and minimum 10 people that look like suspect. Photo line ups: same as live, present sequentially. Degree of certainty statement should be recoreded verbatim.
Manitoba forensic evidence review comittee
Made after Driskell case. Reviewed homicide cases from 15 years in past that relied on hair microscopy evidence. Conditions were that accused plead not guilty, got convicted, appealed saying they were innovent and had appeal dismissed. Two cases: Unger and Sanderson. DNA used to prove hair belonged to neither and Unger set free but Sanderson not because strong case against him
Goudge Inquiry
Charles Smith was not properly educated (basically everything he testified about was out of his scope) and bad autopsy practice. Biased. Think truth not think dirty
Lang Review
Motherisk cases. Lang found that testing was unreliable and inadequate, international forensic standards not met, no supervision from hospital, only preliminary testing was done, and use of this evidence in cases warranted more review
Beaman Review
ID'd cases affected by Motherisk. Wanted to see if evidence had substantial impact on child protection and court desicions. Found 56 cases (12.7% were indigenous)
Forensic Laboratories Act
Any lab doing forensic testing must be accredited to a froensic standard and purpose is to enhance oversight, accountability and transparency.
R. v. Tamara Broomfield
Started Motherisk review. She was convicted of causing bodily harm, aggravated assault, administering noxious subsatnce, and failed to provide necessities of life for her son. Motherisk evidence said she gave her son cocaine. Appealed convictions that arose from Motherisk evidence and 2 convictions quashed.
Joyce Hayman
Charged with administering cocaine to son. Motherisk director testified ( no methodology explained) and she was convicted. Fresh evidence: methodology of motherisk was flawed. Released on appeal almost 23 years later.
R. v. Anthony Hanemaayer
man broke into 15 yo girl room, mom scared him off, saw his face and car. Mom investigated and found Hanemaayer, told police and picked him from line up (bad line up procedure). Went to trial, mom was great on stand and day after he accepted a guilty plea. Later found Paul Bernando was guilty (Bernando's lawyer) but police did nothing. Hanemaayer was acquited (innocence canada) using Hanemaayer's affadavit and results of police investigation.
R. v. Maria Shepherd
Cherged with murder of 3yo daughter. Charles Smith said death was result of abuse (horrible method to reach that conclusion). Shepherd submitted guilty plea and went to prison. Later found that Smith made many errors and Shepherd appealed her conviction and was acquitted. Smith's conclusions discredited so guilty plea was uninformed so not valid
R. v. William Mullins-Johnson
Babysitting niece, she died in her sleep. Arrested for murder and sex. assault. Smith concluded she was strangled and a victim of chronic sex. abuse. 1993. In 2007 was acquitted b/c of new forensic pathology evidence.
R. v. Gallant
Forensic pathologist gave opinion about position of deceased in vehicle at time of collision (in driver's seat or not)
R. v. Perlett
forensic pathologist gave opinion about time elapsed from a shooting to arrival of police on scene based on blood loss and changes in blood
R. v. Jaw
Forensic pathologist gave opinion about distance from which gun was fired
R. v. Butorac
Forensic pathologist said pattern injuries were consistent with object
R. v. RD
Forensic pathologist gave opinion about types of instruments capable of inflicting particular wound
R. v. Taylor
Forensic pathologist said all wound were inflicted from behind and charcateristics of homicidal attack. Opinion inadmissible b/c prejudged issue. Beyonf scope and didn;t meet reliability threshold.
Dinesh Kumar
Son stopped breathing, did CPR and called 911 but son died. Dinesh said similar thing happened to other son and this son was taken to live with his uncle. Charles Smith said shaken abby syndrom and Dinesh arrested and he took guilty plea to murder (90 days intermittently). Years later experts disagreed with Smith's findings and no evidence to say Dinesh harmed son. Entered aquittal
R. v. Hiller
Crown said accused put vitim in headlock which made victim's heart stop. Accused said he never used headlock and no evidence of headlock. Forensic pathologist said headlock caused death. Expert's opinion on COD doesn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt that accused casued victims death. Judge asked questions
R. v. Hamilton
Missing person. Hamilton admit he shot and burned person in burn pit. Forensic anthro. found human and dog bones in pit which confimed his confession. Hamlton said he scattered bones and 13 bones found.
R. v. Robert Pickton
Pig farm excavation to find remains of missing women. 27 counts of first degree murder but trial only included 6 (guilty on all 6). Similar fact evidence: jane doe bones (marks on skull lined up with butchering methods used by Pickton; admitted but disregarded by jury b/c some evidenc wasnt provided to link to similar act. later fousn there was some evidence) and Crawford bone (bone used for DNA testing, inadmissible b/c moral prejudice, later found admissible on appeal).
Lac-mégantic
Train crashed and on fire, 47 dead. Forensic anthro used to see if remains were human (bodies burned for hours son only bones left)
R. v. Brown
Video evidence showing shooters and forensic anthro used to ID the,. Admissible and conviction
R. v. Pickton
Forensic ento. gave estimate of time btwn death and freezing nad opinion on time of year victims died.
R. v. Hosack
Dismembered body parts in different places at different temps. At high temps, linear relationship btwn temp and insect developpment breaks down.
R. v. Truscott
Sex. assault and death of classmate. In og trial TOD was determined based on stomach contents, rigor mortis and decomp. Only he had opportunity based on these. In 2007, 5 entomologists called and 80% said ToD was larger (assumed species of fly by looking at size). One made different assumption (blow flies in vagina, said they were oldest but no support, would ahve taken a day to get to face.
R. v. Bingley
Drug redognition expert can determine ability to operate car while impaired. These experts are automatically admissible but weight can be disputed. Can be challened on any admissibility criteria other than qualified expert.
R. v. Stellato
Impairment to any degree is an offence
R. v. Jackson
Prosecutor must give list of items related to functioning and operation of approved instrument
R. v. Laycock
prohibition order takes effect the day its made
R. v. Stone
automatism is a state of impaired conciousness rather than unconciousness in which an individual though capable of action has no voluntary control over action
R. v. Daviault
exoneration for general intent offences though extreme intoxication
R. v. Sullivan and R. v. Chan
non-mental disorder is a defence even if self induced by voluntary intoxication and offence is violent
R. v. RD
Appealed b/c unfair trial and court of appeal agreed. RD had sex with a 15 yo and he was 27. Did Rd take all reasonable steps to determine her age and was it consenual. Not fair trial because defence wasn't allowed to ask about age. She gave false testimony.
R. v. Rafferty
FB status "everything good is coming my way". Kidnapped and killed child. FB status shows state of mind (mens rea). Defence said no context but was admissible b/c very probative, very relavant and all context was there.
R. v. Sonne
Did he understand his right to counsel. Tweeted things about knowing rights and reading PDFs detailing rights and thinsg like what to do if police comes knocking. COut found tweets showed he knew his rights.
R. v. Craig
Craig talked to 12yo girl; username was first and last name. Contact became sexual and convicted. Self-identification can be used against an accused in court.
R. v. Café
Killed someone, texted friends bragging about murder. Wrote inculpatory rap lyrics and posted pictures of crime scene. Linked him to murder and he confessed. Convicted
R. v. TAH
16yo robbed by three people, thought he recognized one. Found on FB and court accepted this as recognition (not ID) evidence.
R. v. Roulette
Ordered not to contact compliant but contacted thru FB messages sent by her friend. She identified herself in texts. Circumstantial evidence was enough to proce authenticity.
R. v. Andalib-Goortani
Police officer charged with assault with a weapon of protester. Crown relied on photo taken but no onw knew who took photo (couldn't be authenticated). Photo inadmissible.
R. v. Creemer and Cormier
Photos can be authenticated if images are accurate in truly representing facts, they're fair without intention to mislead, and images are verified on oath by person capable of doing so.
R. v. Jarvis
Pen camera taking pciture of schoolgirls. No one knew except him, charged with voyeurism. SCC said students had reasonable expectation of privacy at school (privacy isnt all or nothing, its a normative value, and hidden camera speaks to intent)
R. v. Ewanchuk
Touching (yes or no), sexual nature of contact (yes or no) and absence of consetn (subjective). Proof of actus reus
R. v. Seaboyer
Twin myths cannot enter trial b/c irrelevant and can distort trial process. Myths are prohibited as both a matter of social policy and false logic.
R. v. WM
Charged with sexual offences. Non sexual FB messages (twin myths not engaged). Court held that complainant had no reasonable expectation of privacy in messages
R. v. Mills
Police posed as 14yo girl, Mills sent sexual messages to her. Accused did not have reasonable expectation of privacy over sexually explicit FB messages. Twin myths engaed