Ontario criminal | Charter Of Rights
RIGHT TO BE INFORMED OF SPECIFIC OFFENCE
Accused’s testimony confirmed he knew his jeopardy at outset
Crown brought application for order permitting Crown to tender as part of its case audio videotaped statement of accused taken on day of his arrest “for historical sexual offences”. Complainant alleged 30 years after the fact that when he was 11 or 12 and accused, 26, was his teacher, that there had been sexual relations between them. Accused initially denied any such contact but pursuant to officer’s line of questioning, in which he purported to be sympathetic, accused admitted to less invasive instances of sexual activity initiated by enthusiastic complainant. Crown application granted, video/audio statement of accused admissible. Court found as a fact that accused knew exactly jeopardy he faced when he was told in principal’s office that he was under arrest for historic sexual assault. Accused’s testimony confirmed that he knew his jeopardy at
outset and it did not change.
R. v. Williamson (Nov. 17, 2011, Ont. S.C.J., Tranmer J., File No. 285/10) 98 W.C.B. (2d) 518 (53 pp.).
Accused’s testimony confirmed he knew his jeopardy at outset
Crown brought application for order permitting Crown to tender as part of its case audio videotaped statement of accused taken on day of his arrest “for historical sexual offences”. Complainant alleged 30 years after the fact that when he was 11 or 12 and accused, 26, was his teacher, that there had been sexual relations between them. Accused initially denied any such contact but pursuant to officer’s line of questioning, in which he purported to be sympathetic, accused admitted to less invasive instances of sexual activity initiated by enthusiastic complainant. Crown application granted, video/audio statement of accused admissible. Court found as a fact that accused knew exactly jeopardy he faced when he was told in principal’s office that he was under arrest for historic sexual assault. Accused’s testimony confirmed that he knew his jeopardy at
outset and it did not change.
R. v. Williamson (Nov. 17, 2011, Ont. S.C.J., Tranmer J., File No. 285/10) 98 W.C.B. (2d) 518 (53 pp.).
