You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
I just finished watching this 50 minute lecture on the benefits of not talking to police officers, in any circumstances, and wanted to know what is Canada's version of the 5th amendment? I'm led to believe it's section 7- Life, Liberty, and Security, of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as "...in 1990, the court also decided that Section 7 included the right of an accused person to remain silent."
If any officer or student of law can shed some light on the matter it would be highly appreciated. Also, discussion of the video above would be great too.
Thank you
Advertisement
__________________
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.
I just finished watching this 50 minute lecture on the benefits of not talking to police officers, in any circumstances, and wanted to know what is Canada's version of the 5th amendment? I'm led to believe it's section 7- Life, Liberty, and Security, of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as "...in 1990, the court also decided that Section 7 included the right of an accused person to remain silent."
If any officer or student of law can shed some light on the matter it would be highly appreciated. Also, discussion of the video above would be great too.
Thank you
Quote:
In Canada, equivalent rights exist pursuant to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Under the Charter, an arrested person has the right:
To be informed promptly of the reasons therefor.
To retain and instruct counsel without delay and be informed of that right.
To have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.
The Canadian Charter warning reads (varies by police service): "You are under arrest for _________ (charge), do you understand? You have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. We will provide you with a toll-free telephone lawyer referral service, if you do not have your own lawyer. Anything you say can be used in court as evidence. Do you understand? Would you like to speak to a lawyer?" (See: R. v. Hebert [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151.)
A more detailed version:
I am arresting you for (charge). It is my duty to inform you that you have the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay. You may call any lawyer you want. There is a 24-hour telephone service available which provides a legal aid duty lawyer who can give you legal advice in private. This advice is given without charge and the lawyer can explain the legal aid plan to you. If you wish to contact a legal aid duty lawyer, I can provide you with a telephone number. Do you understand? Do you want to call a lawyer? You are not obliged to say anything, but anything you do say may be given in evidence.
(See: Brydgesa fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal (s. 11(d).) Section 14 of the Charter further provides that a translator must be made available so that the person can understand the proceedings against them. This right to a translator extends to the deaf.
While Section 7 of the Charter guarantees the right to remain silent, Canadian law does not entitle the criminal suspect to have counsel present during the course of an interrogation. Once a suspect has asserted their right to counsel, the police are obliged to hold off in attempting to obtain evidence until the suspect has had a reasonable opportunity to contact legal counsel; however suspects do not have the right to have counsel present during the questioning. Also, in Canada even if the suspect emphatically asserts his decision to remain silent, the police may continue to interrogate him. Although this may give the suspect the impression that his claim of the right to silence is meaningless or that he has no such right, it is perfectly legal. In R. v. Singh (163 C.R.R. (2d) 280), the suspect invoked his right to remain silent 18 times and the police nevertheless continued to question him after each assertion of his right, but the Supreme Court of Canada found this consistent with Canada's Charter rights protections.
Best legal advice you could ever give to anyone; DO NOT SAY A WORD, GET A LAWYER, LET YOUR LAWYER DO THE TALKING.
The police may even attempt to charge you with obstruction of justice if you refuse to cooperate with their interview, they do this as a scare tactic and for further leverage with a guilty plea deal.
I don't mean to sound like a crook, but sadly once Police believe you are guilty, they often do not view the case from an objective perspective, it simply becomes an activity where they try and figure out how they can use any piece of "evidence" against you.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonturbo
Follow me on Instagram @jasonturtle if you want to feel better about your life
Best legal advice you could ever give to anyone; DO NOT SAY A WORD, GET A LAWYER, LET YOUR LAWYER DO THE TALKING.
The police may even attempt to charge you with obstruction of justice if you refuse to cooperate with their interview, they do this as a scare tactic and for further leverage with a guilty plea deal.
I don't mean to sound like a crook, but sadly once Police believe you are guilty, they often do not view the case from an objective perspective, it simply becomes an activity where they try and figure out how they can use any piece of "evidence" against you.
@Spidey: i ask only for a simple clarification. If I really need to seek legal counsel for this I will, though I dont feel like I should for such a simple question, which is just to find out what our Canadian equivalent is. As well, i'm curious why you had to mention how something sounds american or not.
@jasonturbo thanks for the advice!
__________________
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.
@Spidey: i ask only for a simple clarification. If I really need to seek legal counsel for this I will, though I dont feel like I should for such a simple question, which is just to find out what our Canadian equivalent is. As well, i'm curious why you had to mention how something sounds american or not.
@jasonturbo thanks for the advice!
A 10 second search found your answer..ta da!!! The Cdn Charter of Rights & Freedoms. heard of it before?
Legal Rights
Marginal note:Life, liberty and security of person
7. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
Marginal note:Search or seizure
8. Everyone has the right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure.
Marginal note Detention or imprisonment
9. Everyone has the right not to be arbitrarily detained or imprisoned.
Marginal note:Arrest or detention
10. Everyone has the right on arrest or detention
(a) to be informed promptly of the reasons therefor;
(b) to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right; and
(c) to have the validity of the detention determined by way of habeas corpus and to be released if the detention is not lawful.
Marginal note:Proceedings in criminal and penal matters
11. Any person charged with an offence has the right
(a) to be informed without unreasonable delay of the specific offence;
(b) to be tried within a reasonable time;
(c) not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;
(d) to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal;
(e) not to be denied reasonable bail without just cause;
(f) except in the case of an offence under military law tried before a military tribunal, to the benefit of trial by jury where the maximum punishment for the offence is imprisonment for five years or a more severe punishment;
(g) not to be found guilty on account of any act or omission unless, at the time of the act or omission, it constituted an offence under Canadian or international law or was criminal according to the general principles of law recognized by the community of nations;
(h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again; and
(i) if found guilty of the offence and if the punishment for the offence has been varied between the time of commission and the time of sentencing, to the benefit of the lesser punishment.
Marginal note:Treatment or punishment
12. Everyone has the right not to be subjected to any cruel and unusual treatment or punishment.
Marginal note:Self-crimination
13. A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.
Marginal note:Interpreter
14. A party or witness in any proceedings who does not understand or speak the language in which the proceedings are conducted or who is deaf has the right to the assistance of an interpreter.
@Spidey: i ask only for a simple clarification. If I really need to seek legal counsel for this I will, though I dont feel like I should for such a simple question, which is just to find out what our Canadian equivalent is. As well, i'm curious why you had to mention how something sounds american or not.
@jasonturbo thanks for the advice!
I said to seek legal counsel because they are a lot more familiar with Law than the Police are. The 5th Amendment and the Charter of Rights (Canada) are similar but also very different as Canada Laws and US Laws are not the same.
The bolded text in jasonturbo's post was very American because those are terms not used in Canada, but in US prime time TV shows.... Canada has Obstruct Police Officer and Obstructing Justice, but NOT Obstruction of Justice. If you google it, they are similar but not the same. Lastly, Police here do not offer guilty plea deals.
Consider yourselves very lucky to be living in Canada, where you have more rights than you think. Too much, imo, but that's another can of worms.
Canada has Obstruct Police Officer and Obstructing Justice, but NOT Obstruction of Justice. If you google it, they are similar but not the same. Lastly, Police here do not offer guilty plea deals.
I have heard the words "obstruction of justice" come from the lips of a police officer on more than one occasion, on court papers it may say "Obstructing justce", but even the Police/RCMP seemingly choose to use the familiar term of "obstructing justice".
No the police cannot offer guilty please deals, but the crown sure can, and does, constantly.
First hand experience here, Police/RCMP are very quick to "layer" charges, and obstruction is one of the easiest ones to throw down in any situation... and they know it's bullshit but hope it will assist in leveraging you towards the garbage guilty plea deal they will try to sell you later.
Just my .02, always lawyer up regardless of the situation, you don't want to have to deal with having a criminal record... it's a lifetime nuissance.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonturbo
Follow me on Instagram @jasonturtle if you want to feel better about your life
The bolded text in jasonturbo's post was very American because those are terms not used in Canada, but in US prime time TV shows.... Canada has Obstruct Police Officer and Obstructing Justice, but NOT Obstruction of Justice. If you google it, they are similar but not the same. Lastly, Police here do not offer guilty plea deals.
Wow I never knew that. I can appreciate the subtleties between using the terms "Obstructing Justice" and "Obstruction of Justice". I think it would help if we had more Canadian prime time shows that would showcase our legal system. It'd be more informative than learning about the 2nd amendment or the 5th amendment lol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spidey
Consider yourselves very lucky to be living in Canada, where you have more rights than you think. Too much, imo, but that's another can of worms.
You're fully entitled to feel that way. But that's the beauty about living in Canada; I'm entitled to think we dont have enough. CSEC and Five Eyes should ring some bells.
__________________
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury
Signifying nothing.
If you want to know how the Canadian court system works in real life, "This is Wonderland" will give you a better idea. Yes it is fiction, but I think Spidey will agree, somewhat representitive of what happens and the type of people involved. Sorry it was cancelled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Is_Wonderland
I have heard the words "obstruction of justice" come from the lips of a police officer on more than one occasion, on court papers it may say "Obstructing justce", but even the Police/RCMP seemingly choose to use the familiar term of "obstructing justice".
No the police cannot offer guilty please deals, but the crown sure can, and does, constantly.
First hand experience here, Police/RCMP are very quick to "layer" charges, and obstruction is one of the easiest ones to throw down in any situation... and they know it's bullshit but hope it will assist in leveraging you towards the garbage guilty plea deal they will try to sell you later.
Just my .02, always lawyer up regardless of the situation, you don't want to have to deal with having a criminal record... it's a lifetime nuissance.
If you committed the offence, why shouldn't it be forwarded to Crown Counsel. The Police report will contain what had been done/committed by the Accused. If I am going to forward a report to Crown, it is going to include everything. And I will let Crown decide what they want to lay (in BC).
And make the rest of us drivers look like assholes to.
Sounds like Sebberry. If I was a cop, I woulda pulled my gun and shot that pinhead in the face. Too bad "being an annoying douche" isn't a Criminal Code offence.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!
