Case information

None.

Case summaries are prepared by the Office of the Registrar of the Supreme Court of Canada (Law Branch). Please note that summaries are not provided to the Judges of the Court. They are placed on the Court file and website for information purposes only.

Canadian Charter – Right to Counsel – Right to silence – Criminal law – Evidence – Out-of-court statements by accused – Whether s. 10(b) of the Charter prohibits police from using deceptive interrogation techniques that prevent a detainee from obtaining relevant legal advice – Should jurors be instructed to apply the principles in R. v. W(D.), [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742, when the Crown tenders a statement made by an accused who does not testify.

A jury convicted the applicant of the second degree murder of Nicole Parisien, a sex trade worker, by strangulation. The evidence against the applicant includes his confession and a video-tape of a re-enactment at the murder scene. Defence counsel argued at a pre-trial voir dire that the re-enactment videotape was obtained by police trickery that breached s. 10(b) of the Charter. After the applicant had confessed, the police suggested that a re-enactment would be “cathartic” but that it would not occur at the crime scene. The applicant contacted his counsel and sought legal advice about a re-enactment, but not one at the crime scene. He was not given another opportunity to contact counsel after he first realized, en route to the crime scene, that it would occur there. The applicant did not testify at trial. On a voir dire into the jury charge, Wedge J. refused to give a W.(D.) instruction. The Court of Appeal upheld the conviction.