R. v. Cushnie (R.L.), 2015 MBQB 151

• Judge: Bond, J.
• Court: Court of Queen's Bench of Manitoba (Canada)
• Case Date: September 18, 2015
• Jurisdiction: Manitoba
• Citations: 2015 MBQB 151;(2015), 321 Man.R.(2d) 8 (QB)

R. v. Cushnie (R.L.) (2015), 321 Man.R.(2d) 8 (QB)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [2015] Man.R.(2d) TBEd. OC.010

Her Majesty The Queen v. Rita Louise Cushnie (accused)

(CR 10-01-30090; 2015 MBQB 151)

Indexed As: R. v. Cushnie (R.L.)

Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench

Winnipeg Centre

Bond, J.

September 18, 2015.

Summary:

The accused was charged with first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder. She applied for judicial interim release.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, in a decision reported at 321 Man.R.(2d) 1, dismissed the application. The matter proceeded to trial.

The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench convicted the accused as charged.

Criminal Law - Topic 1269

Murder - General principles - First degree murder - What constitutes - The accused (Cushnie) and five others (co-accused) were charged with first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder - Two co-accused (Sanford and Donald (Cushnie's son)), who were convicted as charged, testified against Cushnie - Another co-accused (Timothy) testified in return for immunity - The Crown theorized that Cushnie participated in a conspiracy to kill the victim and was a party to murder (i.e., she was involved in the planning and with disposing of evidence) - She denied her involvement and claimed that the Crown's evidence was too weak to support a conviction because the witnesses lacked credibility - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench convicted the accused as charged - The accused's evidence was not credible, nor did her evidence raise a reasonable doubt - The court considered that Donald, Sanford and Timothy fell into the category of Vetrovec witnesses whose evidence had to be viewed with special caution and required confirmatory evidence - Considering the evidence as a whole, the court was satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt of the accused's guilt - See paragraphs 15 to 83.

Criminal Law - Topic 2647

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Conspiracies - Elements of offence - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench reviewed what must be established in order to convict an accused of conspiracy to commit murder - See paragraphs 25 and 26.

Criminal Law - Topic 2742

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Parties to offences - Necessary intention or knowledge - [See first Criminal Law - Topic 2744 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 2744

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Parties to offences - What constitutes aiding and abetting - The Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench reviewed what had to be established in order to convict a party on a charge of first degree murder (i.e., aiding and abetting) - See paragraphs 27 to 29.

Criminal Law - Topic 2744

Attempts, conspiracies, accessories and parties - Parties to offences - What constitutes aiding and abetting - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1269 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5510

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence of accomplices, co-defendants, informants, etc. - Warning respecting danger of reliance on - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1269 ].

Criminal Law - Topic 5515

Evidence and witnesses - Evidence of accomplices, co-defendants, informants, etc. - Corroboration or confirmatory evidence - [See Criminal Law - Topic 1269 ].

Cases Noticed:

R. v. D.W., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 742; 122 N.R. 277; 46 O.A.C. 352, refd to. [para. 12].

R. v. Vuradin (F.), [2013] 2 S.C.R. 639; 446 N.R. 53; 553 A.R. 1; 583 W.A.C. 1; 2013 SCC 38, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Menow (R.A.) (2013), 294 Man.R.(2d) 236; 581 W.A.C. 236; 2013 MBCA 72 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 14].

R. v. O'Brien, [1954] S.C.R. 666, refd to. [para. 25].

R. v. Briscoe (M.E.) et al., [2010] 1 S.C.R. 411; 400 N.R. 216; 477 A.R. 86; 483 W.A.C. 86; 2010 SCC 13, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Vetrovec; R. v. Gaja, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 811; 41 N.R. 606, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Khela (G.S.), [2009] 1 S.C.R. 104; 383 N.R. 279; 265 B.C.A.C. 31; 446 W.A.C. 31; 2009 SCC 4, refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. James (W.A.) et al., [2009] 1 S.C.R. 146; 383 N.R. 329; 273 N.S.R.(2d) 388; 872 A.P.R. 388; 2009 SCC 5, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Smith (N.W.) - see R. v. James (W.A.) et al.

R. v. Kehler (R.A.), [2004] 1 S.C.R 328; 317 N.R. 30; 346 A.R. 19; 320 W.A.C. 19; 2004 SCC 11, refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Khelawon (R.), [2006] 2 S.C.R. 787; 355 N.R. 267; 220 O.A.C. 338; 2006 SCC 57, refd to. [para. 67].

R. v. Rowe (J.) (2011), 285 O.A.C. 249; 281 C.C.C.(3d) 42; 2011 ONCA 753, refd to. [para. 70].

R. v. Carter, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 938; 47 N.R. 288; 46 N.B.R.(2d) 142; 121 A.P.R. 142, refd to. [para. 78].

Counsel:

Mark R. Kantor, for the Crown;

Michael P. Cook and Jody L. Ostapiw, for the accused.

This case was heard before Bond, J., of the Manitoba Court of Queen's Bench, Judicial Centre of Winnipeg, who delivered the following judgment on September 18, 2015.