R. v. Stinchcombe took place during November 7th, 1991
Mr. Stinchcombe was a lawyer charged with breach of trust, theft, and fraud. The Crown failed to disclose information related to a witness, who had provided written and verbal statements. When Mr. Stinchcombe`s lawyer asked to see the statements, the Crown denied the request. Mr. Stinchcombe went to the Appeals Court who sided with the Crown and didn`t provide adequate rationale for the decision.
The Supreme Court heard the case and overturned the Appeals Court ruling and ordered a new trial.The Supreme Court had seven judges on the case; La Forest, L`Heureux-Dubé, Sopinka, Gonthier, Cory, McLachlin and Lacobucci. All the Supreme Court Judges ruled in favour of the defense. They stated that the Crown is obligated to provide all relevant evidence or information, that is not privileged, to the defence to allow the appellant to make full answer to the charges.
This set precedence for all future cases when the defense is refused evidence or information that can effect the outcome of a trial. In this case, the Supreme Court of Canada voted in favour of both society and the individual by making sure that no one has an unfair trial because of the withholding of evidence by the Crown.
No comments:
Post a Comment