Case information

Criminal law — Evidence — Statements by accused to arresting police officer — Failure of accused to testify — Whether trial judge was correct in refusing to permit accused to cross-examine arresting officer in order to elicit her statements upon arrest — Whether it was open to trial judge to permit accused to elicit statements and to give limiting instruction to jury in respect to the evidence — Whether such a limiting instruction would be contrary to s. 4(6) of the Canada Evidence Act, R.S.C. 1985, c. C 5?

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.

On December 15, 2014, Ms. Beaulieu fatally stabbed her husband. When arrested, she made two statements to the police. After a s. 10(a) Charter caution advising her of the reasons for the arrest, she stated, “No, because it was actually self defense can’t you see my face”. After a s. 10(b) Charter caution and asked if she wanted to contact a lawyer, she stated “No, because this is self defense I know”. On a voir dire to determine whether the defence could elicit these statements through cross-examination of the arresting officer, the trial judge ruled that the statements would only be admissible if Ms. Beaulieu testified. She did not testify, so the statements were not admitted. A jury convicted Ms. Beaulieu of second degree murder. The Court of Appeal dismissed an appeal.