The dissent characterized a caution as “one simple sentence” that “sets the necessary foundation for voluntariness and enhances the fairness of the process.” When does a witness become a suspect? In contrast, the dissent disagreed that a warning should be limited only to suspects and detainees, but rather, that it should be given at the outset of all interviews. The majority held that fairness considerations arise mainly once a person becomes a target of the state because imposing a caution each time a person is questioned would be burdensome on the administration of justice, if there is no unfairness. ![]() This is especially true in cases where a person who is not a suspect is being questioned. The majority noted that while the absence of a caution is an important factor in deciding whether or not a statement was made voluntarily, it is not decisive. Is a caution necessary when speaking to someone who has not been accused?Ī caution is meant to rectify an informational imbalance between the accused, who is in a state of vulnerability, and law enforcement authorities. Determining whether or not a statement is admissible is a fact-specific inquiry, involving multiple considerations, such as the making of threats or promises and police trickery. Under the common law, a statement is inadmissible if there is reasonable doubt as to whether the statement was given voluntarily. The issue to be decided by the Supreme Court was whether the accused’s earlier statements were voluntary and therefore admissible under the common law confessions rule. Tessier was later formally accused, read his rights, and cautioned at the time of his arrest. ![]() Tessier revealed he had recently purchased a firearm. During a second interview on the same day, Mr. Tessier that he had the right to remain silent, that his statements could be used in evidence, or that he had the right to counsel. He voluntarily agreed to an interview with the police, who were interviewing a number of the victim’s friends. Tessier was a friend of the victim, who was fatally shot. Individuals and businesses involved in compliance investigations should take note of this important case and understand its consequences – namely, that a lack of caution does not mean the witness is not (or will be) a suspect, nor does it mean the witness’ statement cannot be used in evidence as a voluntary and admissible confession. ![]() Can statements to law enforcement made by individuals who have not been informed of their legal rights become a voluntary confession? In R v Tessier 1, the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada answered this question in the affirmative.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |