# data[].attributes.body
R. v. Wilson, 2001 BCCA 405

# data[].attributes.body
-The incident occurred June 8, 1996
-On the night of, Todd McComber had consumed six or seven beer before arriving to Rocky Cameron's residence
-After stopping at the residence of the accused finding no one there, McComber and Cameron arrived at the pub where he found the accused leaving the pub. The spoke briefly and agreed to drive to the Northwood Pub
-As the two vehicles traveled along, the accused in one and McComber and Cameron in the other, the accused vehicle attempted to overtake and pass the McComber vehicle
-The accused's vehicle struck the left rear corner of the truck ahead of him
-McComber lost control of the vehicle which left the road, rolled serveral times, then hit a tree
-Neither McComber or Cameron were wearing seat belts.
-Cameron was ejected from the vehicle and died.

# data[].attributes.body
Rocky Cameron's death is inadequate. No procedures were followed, lawfully, to obtain the breath sample witnesses weren't interviewed for up to 6 months after the case and evidence was either lost or destroyed
court dismissed the drunk driving appeal. The alcohol did not effect the driving, and therefore did not help the death in anyway

# data[].attributes.body
The technical requirements leading to a conviction on Count No. 2 have not been met, and as a result a reasonable doubt arises with respect to that count. Appellant submitted that the judge erred in taking into account alcohol consumption.

# data[].attributes.body
Granted leave to appeal and substitute a sentence of three years in place of the four years imposed by the sentencing judge.

# data[].attributes.body
An appropriate sentence would be three years being mindful of deterrence, both general and specific, the moral culpability of the offender, the gravity of the offence, and the evidence displaying a lack of remorse on the part of the appellant. General deterrence was a predominant factor as the accused’s attitude and actions, both before and since the events, specific to deterrence was of very real concern and the degree of moral culpability in the present case was found to be quite high. Reasons of sentencing by the judge include failure to wear seat belt, failure to provide a driver's license and insurance, excessive speed, changing lanes without signal, no stop at railway crossing.

# data[].attributes.body
Even if the evidence wasn't obtained correctly, they all know they each had many drinks that night, and they did the breathalyzer willingly  as it never stated 'the breath sample was obtained through breaking McCombers rights and freedoms, he felt violated.' No where did it say that. Plus the court new he was drinking, they have witnesses at each pub (bar tenders because they would've been sober.) and the breath sample. I think due to the police officers wrongs they should've been suspended or demoted to paperwork because theres no reason a person should've been able to been dismissed due to their ignorance.