Group #4 by Carrie Liu https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9 Fengyun Liu, Phillipia Green, Austin Gillespie-O'Connor en-us 2016-06-12 22:55:41 UTC 2016-06-13 16:25:25 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet-assets.s3.amazonaws.com/icons/Clouds.png R. v. Hebert, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 151 skyandfly788 https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436367 Name of the case: R. v. Hebert

Subjects:  Constitutional law Evidence

Collection:  Supreme Court Judgments

Date:1990-06-21 

This case were between the Neil Gerald Hebert and government. This case can be found in the 1990 Supreme Court report, volume 2 and page of 151. --> 


]]> 2016-06-13 01:19:00 UTC https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436367 1.     Determine what section of the charter is being challenged. skyandfly788 https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436433 In this case, the accused's right to remain silent under s. 7 of the Charter was violated. 

]]> 2016-06-13 01:20:19 UTC https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436433 2.     Summarize the case and surrounding charter issue skyandfly788 https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436477 The accused arrested for robbery and informed on arrest of his right to counsel. At the station after counsel, he advice the police he did not wish to make a statement and preferred to remain silent.  The police then place him in a cell and an undercover police officer posing as another suspect. During a conversation with him the accused made incriminating statements implicating him in the robbery.  The Judge stated that the accused right to counsel under section 10 and his right to remain silent under Section 7 have been violated and the crown acquitted the accused for a new trial.  The police violated his rights to remain silent under the section Charter by tricking him and the evidence obtained in breach of Section 7 should be exclude and was pursuing section 24(2) of the Charter.  This was a serious violation of his rights under the Charter because the action of the police was deliberate seen only evidence against accused was obtained in unprofessional manner by undercover police posing as a suspect. It is contrary to the justice system, for an accused to secure his own conviction under illicit. ]]> 2016-06-13 01:20:58 UTC https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436477 3.     Highlight section 1 results in the case. skyandfly788 https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436501 Section 1 of the Charter was inapplicable because the police conduct was not a limit "prescribed by law" within the meaning of that section. The limiting effect on the accused's right to remain silent was not "prescribed by law", and it is therefore unnecessary to consider the application of s. 1 of the Charter.

]]> 2016-06-13 01:21:30 UTC https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436501 4.     Summarize the outcome of the case skyandfly788 https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436520 The Crown offered no evidence, and the accused was later acquitted.  The Court of Appeal set aside the accused's acquittal and ordered a new trial. The appeal should be allowed.

]]> 2016-06-13 01:22:03 UTC https://padlet.com/skyandfly788/owi3eseydcw9/wish/114436520