Criminal Cases - Criminal Law - Lecture Notes, Study notes of Criminal Law

Download Criminal Cases - Criminal Law - Lecture Notes and more Study notes Criminal Law in PDF only on Docsity! Criminal Cases The victim was a part-time taxi driver in Montreal. On April 12, 1991, his taxi was discovered submerged in the Madawaska River, near Arnprior, Ontario. His body was not found until June 9, 1991, when it was discovered off the side of a road just outside Arnprior. An autopsy revealed that he had been killed by multiple stab wounds to the back. Wounds to several ribs indicated a sub- stantial use of force. On the same day the victim disappeared, a man noticed a taxi being driven toward the Madawaska River. When he ran to the river, he saw the taxi sinking into the water. He turned and saw Menard with a duffle bag and some clothing. He called the police, and Constable Nicholas of the Ontario Provincial Police arrived at the scene. Nicholas asked Menard what had happened. Menard replied that he had been hitchhiking and was picked up by a man named Phil who stopped the car and told him to get out. Phil then drove the car into the river and ran away toward the highway. More police arrived and examined the area where the car had entered the water. They found only one set of footprints. On top of the hill they discovered a bundle of wet clothing with stains of blood. After the victim was found and the car was removed from the water, the bloodstains on the driver's seat and on the floor plus the blood on the wet clothes were matched to the victim's blood. All the blood samples were consistent with the victim's blood type, which is shared by less than 1 percent of the population. Contact staining consistent with the victim's blood type was also found on Menard's jeans. A forensic geologist testified that soil samples taken from the area where the victim's body was found were consistent with samples found on Menard's boots. A jury convicted Menard of second-degree murder. His appeals to the Ontario Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court of Canada were dismissed. 1. Categorize the Crown's evidence under the headings Eyewitness Evidence, physical Evidence, and Expert Witness Evidence. 2. Given that the victim suffered multiple stab wounds, what valuable piece of evidence is missing from the case summary? 3. Put yourself in the position of Menard's lawyer. How would you challenge the type of evidence presented? Regina v. Gilling (I997), 34 O.R. (3d) 392 (Ont. C.A.) (Law in Action, Blair, p.180) Gilling was charged with second-degree murder for slashing the victim's throat. Gilling's father took him to the police station where the father gave a videotaped statement that told of a conversation he had had with his son. He said his son told him that he had slashed the victim to ward off a sexual assault. The father also said that he was not sure when the accused arrived at his house. At trial, the father recanted his earlier statement, denying that Gilling had admitted committing the murder. He also stated that he was certain his son had arrived at his house the day before the murder. The trial judge held a voir dire to determine the admissibility of the father's earlier, videotaped statement. The defence objected to the statement on the grounds that it was hearsay evidence. After ruling the statement admissible, the judge informed the jury that he had carefully considered the admissibility of the statement according to a Supreme Court ruling. He said he had found the videotaped statement sufficiently reliable to allow it to be entered as evidence. The accused was convicted and appealed to the Ontario Court of Appeal. The higher court overturned the conviction, stating that the judge's remarks on the reliability of the father's videotaped statement may have led the jury to believe that the judge thought the statement should Docsity.com