Blog

Class aptent taciti sociosqu ad litora

R v L B & L (2007)

  • Clayton Rice, Q.C.

During trial preparation in this conspiracy and drug trafficking case it was learned that the Crown Attorney was withholding information that was relevant to the credibility and reliability of a Calgary police officer who was involved in the investigation. Mr Rice, and counsel for the two co-defendants, brought a joint application for disclosure of the information under ss 7 and 24(1) of the Charter of Rights. The evidence on the motion showed that the police officer had provided an expert opinion to the affiant for the wiretap authorizations regarding investigative necessity. In granting the motion, the trial judge ruled that the expert police officer was imbued in the investigation and that the withheld information was relevant. The information that was then disclosed revealed that the expert police officer was addicted to crack cocaine during the time that he provided the opinion about investigative necessity. He had been investigated by the RCMP under the Code of Conduct and subsequently resigned. This information was then used in a subsequent motion to exclude the wiretap evidence under ss 8 and 24(2) of the Charter of Rights.

Comments are closed.