Kinesiology 4459A/B Lecture Notes - Lecture 16: Canlii, Victim Surcharge, Hockey Canada
20 Feb 2017
School
Department
Course
Professor
Document Summary
Lecture 16: v. owen, 2004 canlii 8637 (on sc) Co(cid:373)plai(cid:374)a(cid:374)t (cid:449)as alleged to ha(cid:448)e (cid:271)ee(cid:374) ki(cid:272)ki(cid:374)g a(cid:272)(cid:272)used"s tea(cid:373)(cid:373)ate"s feet. There (cid:449)as a ta(cid:272)kle (cid:862)(cid:272)o(cid:373)pletely fro(cid:373) (cid:271)ehi(cid:374)d(cid:863) that (cid:449)as (cid:862)deli(cid:271)erate a(cid:374)d (cid:448)i(cid:272)ious(cid:863) Referee had (cid:862)(cid:374)e(cid:448)er see(cid:374) a ta(cid:272)kle of the type that took the (cid:272)o(cid:373)plai(cid:374)a(cid:374)t do(cid:449)(cid:374) (cid:271)y (cid:271)reaki(cid:374)g his leg(cid:863) Do you agree with the decision: v. w. (d. ) [1991] 1 s. c. r. 742 (supreme court of canada decision) that is the seminal authority on defining the burden of proof in criminal trials. It sets out a three stage analysis to be included in jury instructions. The order of the steps are not significant but the steps must all be applied separately. It is wrong when considering conflicting evidence of credibility to weigh one story over the other. The trier of fact cannot prefer one story over the other or consider who is most credi(cid:271)le. The (cid:862)either/or(cid:863) approach, preferring one over the other should be avoided.
