Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora

R v A (2016)

  • Clayton Rice, K.C.

In this homicide case L and P were charged with second degree murder following the death of H who was a fellow inmate in a remand centre. Mr Rice was retained by A who was charged with being an accessory after the fact. L and P were subsequently committed to stand trial on a count of manslaughter at their preliminary inquiry and the Crown Attorney then obtained a direct Indictment charging A with being the accessory. The state alleged that A assisted in a cover up by mopping the scene on the range outside H’s cell where he was found severely beaten. An investigator concluded that the floor was presumptively tracked with H’s blood. Mr Rice initiated a forensic examination of the mop that A was seen using on a video surveillance camera. The mop tested negative for blood, there was no DNA to be examined and the state’s case unravelled. The Crown Attorney stayed the charge.

Comments are closed.