Afleveringen
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike celebrates the Charter’s 43rd birthday! On April 17, 1982 the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms came into force. Listen to learn about some of the early discussion on the remedy provisions, from s. 26 to s. 24 to s. 24(1) and (2).
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Alberta Court of King's Bench decision R. v. Tierney, 2025 ABKB 223 where police delayed providing a man access to counsel for more than 16 hours after his arrest, claiming it was justified while seeking a search warrant for fear evidence might be destroyed. The police also failed to bring the man before a justice, waiting about 33 hours to do so. How did the judge feel about these delays after Crown conceded Charter breaches. Was evidence supporting serious charges excluded? This case provides a good summary of the case law and things a police officer needs to think about if delaying access to counsel.
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
TRIGGER WARNING: This episode contains graphic content, including suicide, which may shock, offend or upset.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Supreme Court of Canada's 2024 Year in Review. How do last year's stats stack up against previous years? How long does it take the court to decide a matter? And how often is the court split on the outcome of a case?
The Supreme Court of Canada Marks 150 Years of Service to Canadians
Royal Canadian Mint Supreme Court of Canada Commemorative Circulation Coin
Mike also updates two IIO cases.
IIO 2023-248: Mackenzie RCMP — Public Report
IIO 2022-249: Abbotsford Police — Information Bulletin
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses BC’s Independent Investigations Office (IIO) and referrals to Crown Counsel. What can be learned from the data? How long does it take for the IIO to conduct an investigation forwarded for prosecution? How long does it take before a decision on charges is made? And how many convictions have been obtained after trial? The answers may (or may not) surprise you!
IIO Annual Report 2023-2024
IIO Annual Report 2022-20232024-160: Saanich Police
2021-171: Vernon RCMP — Crown's Clear Statement
2020-110: Williams Lake RCMP
2024-265: Vancouver Transit Police
2024-223: Abbotsford Police
2024-156: Nanaimo RCMP
2016-051: Prince George RCMP — trial judgement acquittal
BCPS Media & Clear Statement — Stay of proceedings relating to charges arising out of the death of Dale Culver
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Supreme Court of Canada decision R. v. Donawa, 2025 SCC 10 where police found a handgun in a driver’s fanny pack during a roadside stop. The police sent the handgun for testing, but did not send the magazine or the ammunition found in it. A trial judge ruled the handgun was NOT a firearm — as defined under s. 2 of the Criminal Code — because it required special expertise, considerable time, and a part not readily available to make it operable. The Ontario Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge's decision, finding the gun was an operable firearm because it was capable of firing when loaded. The Supreme Court of Canada was then asked to weigh in. Listen and find out what their take on the issue was.
Criminal Code (s. 2):
"firearm means a barrelled weapon from which any shot, bullet or other projectile can be discharged and that is capable of causing serious bodily injury or death to a person, and includes any frame or receiver of such a barrelled weapon and anything that can be adapted for use as a firearm."
Lower court ruling
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses a crime prevention project he spearheaded called “OPERATION LODESTAR”, meaning one who serves as a guide or model. As part of this initiative, a poster was released depicting a young boy dressed up like a gangster with the caption — “When I grow up I want to be just like daddy. Kids live what they learn. Be the parent your child needs.” The campaign was both criticized and commended. Listen how the project was started and maybe you can use some of what you learn.
Includes audio from Operation Lodestar: Parenting Matters video.
More resources including posters & Parenting Matters video link.
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Ontario Court of Appeal decision R. v. Kostuk, 2025 ONCA 195 where police arrested a man in the stabbing death of his friend. The man — who claimed he was suffering from schizophrenia and had not taken his medication — argued the police breached his s. 10(b) Charter right to counsel because they (1) took no steps to address his mental health issues before he spoke with his lawyer and (2) did not give him another opportunity to speak with his lawyer after he had taken his medication. Were the police required to take the man to the hospital as he requested? Was a second advisement about the right to counsel required after the man received his medication? What is the test for assessing cognitive capacity in the s. 10(b) context? And just how did the Court of Appeal address these questions.
Lower court ruling
Lower court sentencing
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Ontario Court of Appeal decision R. v. Plummer, 2011 ONCA 350 where police saw a man seated in a vehicle illegally parked near an apartment door where people would buy drugs. As the police passed by, the man appeared shocked or surprised and moved forward while slouching down as if to conceal something. When the man provided his name, the police recognized him as being associated to an officer safety alert describing him as possibly armed with a handgun. The man was asked to exit the vehicle and — when patted down — police found he was wearing a bullet proof vest. As police moved in to search the car, the man fled. Police discovered a loaded handgun in an overnight bag that was near where the man had been sitting. Was the man’s detention lawful? And, if he had standing to challenge the searches, was the vehicle and bag search valid as an incident to investigative detention? Or is this common law power limited only to a pat-down of the detainee?
Lower court ruling
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal decision R. v. Harpold, 2024 SKCA 26, where a plain clothed police officer saw a man masturbating in his car in the parking lot of a mall as she walked by it and looked through the driver’s window. When this went to trial, the man argued his vehicle was not a “public place" for the purpose of an indecent act charge. Is a private motor vehicle parked in a public place itself a public place for the purpose of the “indecent act” provision? Does the express or implied “access” as of right or by invitation required in the meaning of “public place” require physical access, or is visual access sufficient? Listen to find out what Saskatchewan’s top court ruled.
Regina Police Service press release
Edmonton Service press release
R. v. Desylva, 2025 ABKB 130
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the case law classic R. v. Jir, 2010 BCCA 497 where a police officer, after acting on an anonymous tip, stopped a motorist and immediately arrested him. When police searched the trunk of his car without a warrant, 120,000 ecstasy tablets were discovered. Did the police have enough grounds to arrest the man based on the anonymous tip? Or was more needed? Mike looks at these questions and what factors you can use to assess the reliability of information provided by a tipster.
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike again discusses recent survey results from Statistics Canada about the amount of confidence Canadians had in various institutions, including the school system, media, parliament, the justice system and courts, and the police. Just how did the compare to these other institutions? Check out the results for yourself.
Confidence in institutions, by gender and other selected sociodemographic characteristics
Confidence in institutions, by gender and province
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Alberta Court of King’s Bench decision R. v. Desylva, 2025 ABKB 36 where a police officer was shot at by a man being pursued. When the man’s car got stuck in the snow, the officer unloaded 25 rounds at the man as his car spun out. The man fled on foot, only to be located laying in the snow suffering from serious gun shot wounds to his head and neck area. The man was transported to hospital and his clothing, which had been removed and bagged by hospital staff, was seized and searched some 11 hours after arrest. Items police found in the man’s clothing included a large sum of cash and 40 grams of cocaine. This evidence was crucial to drug charges and could explain the reasons or motive for the man’s evasion and flight from police. Did the time span of 11 hours between arrest and search render it outside the scope of the search incident to arrest doctrine? Or could the police offer a reasonable explanation for the delay?
ASIRT Investigative Report
Video of shooting
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Manitoba Court of Appeal decision R. v. Pietz, 2025 MBCA 5 where police arrested a man in relation to the presumed death of another. After unsuccessfully trying to obtain a confession from the man, police took him for a lengthy drive in an effort to locate the victim’s body. During the ride, police kept the man in handcuffs, used offensive and profane language, and did not provide him with shoes, a jacket or a blanket while he was outside the police vehicle in chilly weather. Did the man’s removal from police headquarters in the middle of the night without his consent — along with the conditions of the ride — render the detention arbitrary under s. 9 of the Charter? And was an additional s. 10(b) advisement about the right to consult counsel required for this procedure? Listen now and learn a little — or a lot!
Lower court ruling
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses R. v. Grassing, 2025 SKCA 1 where police where asked by a probation officer to do a curfew check and possibly search the residence of a man on a Conditional Sentence Order (CSO). The CSO had two search conditions, both requiring a reasonable suspicion the man was breaching a condition of his CSO before police could search. When the police searched the man’s apartment, they found methamphetamine and a firearm. A trial judge found the probation officer’s request was enough by itself to justify the search, the evidence was admitted at trial, and the man was convicted of drug and weapons offences. But how did the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal feel about the matter? Was the probation officer’s request enough or was more required? And if more was required, did the facts within police awareness meet the reasonable suspicion standard? Or did the search breach the man’s s. 8 Charter right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure?
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses R. v. Alexander, 2025 ONSC 57 where police tried to stop a vehicle for a traffic related reason. The driver — along with the vehicle’s passenger — fled from the attempted stop and then ran from the vehicle only to be apprehended nearby after a foot chase. The police searched the car and later — using a K9 — found a loaded handgun under a bush not far from where the driver was arrested. The defence lawyer alleged police action was tainted by racial profiling — the vehicle had been targeted because its occupants were young, black males driving late at night. Was this a valid claim? Was searching the vehicle incident to arrest for the offence of flight from police justified? Or did searching it exceed the scope of the common law power?
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the case law classic R. v. Pearson, 2017 ONCA 389 where a police officer, after stopping a motorist, arrested him for drug impaired driving. Police opened the trunk and searched a knapsack found in it, discovering two shotgun shells, which the officer seized. As it turned out, the driver was later charged with two murders, one occurring the day before the traffic stop and another about two weeks later. The shells found in the knapsack were similar in composition to the ones used to commit the murders and Crown wanted to tender them as evidence at the murder trials. But was their discovery lawful? Was opening the trunk and searching the knapsack as an incident to the drug impaired driving arrest valid? Or did it exceed the scope of the common law power?
Lower court ruling
Supreme Court of Canada leave dismissalThe 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the case law classic R. v. Stonefish, 2019 ONCA 914 where a police officer, after stopping a motorist for an equipment violation, smelled the odour of burnt marihauana and saw a green leafy substance in the car’s console. The motorist was then arrested for possessing a controlled substance and police opened the car’s hood to discover a stash of cocaine in a Ziploc bag valued at between $11,000 — $18,000 on the street. Was opening the car’s hood lawful as an incident to the drug arrest for possession of this small amount of marihuana? Or did it exceed the scope of the common law power? Mike looks at these and other questions.
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses 'Christmas carding', a crime prevention tactic initiated several years ago. Listen how the project — dubbed OPERATION RESOLUTION — was started and how the media portrayed it. All the best to LIIP listeners this holiday season. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!
Homicide trends in Canada, 2023
AbbyPD Christmas CardThe 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the Supreme Court of Canada decision R. v. Campbell, 2024 SCC 42 where police arrested a known drug dealer and lawfully seized his cellphone. After the arrest, four text messages lit up the locked cellphone screen and appeared to offer a sale of drugs, possibly laced with fentanyl. Without a warrant, the police engaged in a conversation with the sender of the texts by impersonating the drug dealer and — in the process — orchestrated a meet to purchase drugs. When the accused came to the drug dealer’s apartment, he was arrested and found in possession of heroin laced with fentanyl. Was the conduct of the police by engaging in the text conversation a search for Charter purposes? If it was a search, could the police lawfully do what they did? Was the situation facing the police urgent enough to trigger exigent circumstances? Was a Part VI authorization under the Criminal Code required? Did the search incident to arrest doctrine apply?
Ontario Court of Appeal ruling
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
-
Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message.
In this episode, Mike discusses the New Brunswick Court of Appeal decision R. v. Gallant, 2024 NBCA 135 where a police officer applied for and received a warrant to seize and analyze blood samples taken by hospital staff for medical purposes. The affiant’s ITO referenced police reports from two other officers as a basis for their reasonable grounds to support the warrant. This included (1) the circumstances surrounding a serious accident as reported to an officer by another driver and (2) the very strong odour of alcohol coming from the accused’s breath as detected by an officer accompanying him in the back of an ambulance on the way to the hospital. Did the affiant’s grounds supply a sufficient basis for the search warrant? And what sort of test does the reviewing judge use in deciding whether the authorizing judge could have issued the warrant?
The 2025 International Use of Force Expert Conference April 29-May 1, 2025
This conference is designed for professionals who have an interest in developing a deeper understanding of this subject matter area, or in building the foundational skills towards becoming a court-qualified use of force expert.
Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]
- Laat meer zien
