Download
1 / 5
50 likes | 200 Views
The case of R. v. Therens highlighted the transformative power of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which increased citizens' roles in law reform. Before 1982, there was a misconception that only Americans needed to be informed of their right to a lawyer. Therens, charged with impaired driving after a night of drinking, wasn't informed of this right. The Supreme Court ruled that his conviction must be overturned due to this violation of his rights, establishing a precedent that evidence obtained without respecting Charter Rights could be excluded, thus protecting the integrity of the justice system.
E N D
Courts and Law Reform • Theren’s Case • Charter of Rights and Freedoms gave Canadian citizens a greater role in law reform • Courts could only declare a law invalid if it exceeded the scope of their authority • Charter meant the court could strike down any law which infringed on rights listed in CCRF
R. v. Therens • Idea of being informed of right to a lawyer is a misconception prior to 1982. • Only American’s had to be informed of a right to a lawyer • Media • Miranda only applied in U.S. • Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed this right for Canadians
R. v. Therens • Case of Paul M. Therens • Night of drinking • Learned friends killed while canoeing • Drove his car home and smashed into tree • Police demanded Therens provide breath sample • Did not inform him of right to a lawyer • Went to police station and gave breath sample • Charged and later convicted with impaired driving
R. v. Therens • Charter challenge • Lawyer argued Therens detained in police station and denied right to a lawyer • Guaranteed in s. 10 (Charter) • Supreme Court overturned conviction ruling test results wrongly obtained • Admit them would “bring administration of justice into disrepute” • Message: Supreme Court would exclude evidence if Charter Rights not respected.
