|
|
|
|
|
R. V. CreightonR. v. Creighton is a landmark case from the Supreme Court of Canada where the Court found that the standard for criminal liability for some offences can be lowered and not offend the Charter. This case marked the last in series of cases, beginning with R. v. Tutton, discussing the use of an objective standard for determining mens rea in criminal offences. Background On the afternoon of October 27, 1989, Marc Creighton, Frank Caddedu, and Ms. Martin consumed large amounts of cocaine and alcohol. Creighton injected himself and his two consenting companions with cocaine. Martin immediately began to convulse and stop breathing. They were unsuccessful in resustating her. Caddedu tried to call 911 but Creighton's threats prevented him from doing so. They cleaned any signs of fingerprints from around the house and then left. Caddedu came back several hours later and called the police. Creighton was charged under s. 222(5)(a) and (b) of the Criminal Code for manslaughter. The issue before the Court was whether the common law use of manslaughter (s.222) violated section 7 of the Charter. Ruling The majority was written by McLachlin J. with L'Heureux-Dube, LaForest, Gonthier, and Cory JJ. concurring. The Court found that the common law requirement for mens rea of manslaughter of "objective forseeability of the risk of bodily harm which is neither trivial nor transitory, in the context of a dangerous act" to be constitutional. Dissent Dissent was written by Lamer C.J. with Sopinka, Iacobucci, and Major JJ. concurring. The dissent was of the opinion that the standard for manslaughter should be "objective forseeability of the risk of death", and that the objective standard should take into account the experiences of the accused and their particular "human frailties". Comments The most curious part of the case is the 180 degree turn in LaForest's opinion. In all the previous cases he had expressed strong beliefs in the use of a modified objective test as per Lamer. However, on this case he had completely changed his position with little justification.
|
 |
|
| Copyright 2005-2009 OnPedia.com. All Rights Reserved |
|
|