R. v. J.D.G., (1999) 20 B.C.T.C. 150 (SC)

• Judge: Romilly, J.
• Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia (Canada)
• Case Date: April 12, 1999
• Jurisdiction: British Columbia
• Citations: (1999), 20 B.C.T.C. 150 (SC)

R. v. J.D.G. (1999), 20 B.C.T.C. 150 (SC)

MLB headnote and full text

Temp. Cite: [1999] B.C.T.C. TBEd. AU.088

Her Majesty the Queen v. J.D.G.

(X36573)

Indexed As: R. v. J.D.G.

British Columbia Supreme Court

Chilliwack

Romilly, J.

April 13, 1999.

Summary:

The accused was charged with sexual offences alleged to have occurred in 1991 against his niece. The accused applied to stay the proceedings asserting that his ss. 7, 11(b) and 11(d) Charter rights had been infringed. Particularly, the accused argued that the pre-charge delay breached his Charter rights. Moreover, failure of the police to take statements from potential witnesses when the alleged incident first came to their attention, the loss, or destruc­tion of, the complainant's audiotape of her first inter­view with the police, and the loss of the audiotape of the first interview with the complainants's mother, had so prejudiced him that he could not make full answer and defence.

The British Columbia Supreme Court dismissed the application.

Editor's note: for related decisions see (1999), 18 B.C.T.C. 24; (1999), 17 B.C.T.C. 220; [1999] B.C.T.C. Uned. 671; 10 B.C.A.C. 38; 21 W.A.C. 38.

Civil Rights - Topic 3128

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right of accused to obtain information or evidence - See paragraphs 1 to 34.

Civil Rights - Topic 3133

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Criminal and quasi-criminal proceedings - Right of accused to make full answer and defence - See para­graphs 1 to 34.

Civil Rights - Topic 3264

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Accused's right to - Denial of right - See paragraphs 1 to 20.

Civil Rights - Topic 3265

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Ac­cused's right to - What constitutes "within a reasonable time" - See paragraphs 1 to 20.

Civil Rights - Topic 3270

Trials - Due process, fundamental justice and fair hearings - Speedy trial - Ac­cused's right to - Evidence of prejudice and causes of delay - See paragraphs 1 to 34.

Civil Rights - Topic 8374

Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms - Denial of rights - Remedies - Stay of proceedings - See paragraphs 1 to 34.

Criminal Law - Topic 128

General principles - Rights of accused - Right to make full answer and defence - See paragraphs 1 to 34.

Criminal Law - Topic 129

General principles - Rights of accused - Right to discovery or production - See paragraphs 21 to 34.

Criminal Law - Topic 4505

Procedure - Trial - Special duties of Crown - Duty to disclose evidence prior to trial - See paragraphs 21 to 34.

Cases Noticed:

R. v. Khan, [1990] 2 S.C.R. 531; 113 N.R. 53; 41 O.A.C. 353; 59 C.C.C.(3d) 92; 79 C.R.(3d) 1, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. Smith (A.L.), [1992] 2 S.C.R. 915; 139 N.R. 323; 55 O.A.C. 321; 75 C.C.C.(3d) 257, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. K.G.B., [1993] 1 S.C.R. 740; 148 N.R. 241; 61 O.A.C. 1; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 257, refd to. [para. 8].

R. v. DeSousa, [1992] 2 S.C.R. 944; 142 N.R. 1; 56 O.A.C. 109; 15 C.R.(4th) 66, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Naoufal (N.) (1994), 70 O.A.C. 214; 89 C.C.C.(3d) 321 (C.A.), affd. [1994] 3 S.C.R. 1020; 197 N.R. 161; 90 O.A.C. 346; 94 C.C.C.(3d) 96, refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Dikah (A.) - see R. v. Naoufal (N.).

R. v. P.S.L. (1995), 66 B.C.A.C. 178; 108 W.A.C. 178; 103 C.C.C.(3d) 341 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 11].

R. v. Woodley (M.D.) (1993), 21 B.C.A.C. 275; 37 W.A.C. 275; 42 M.V.R.(2d) 36 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Adams (J.R.), [1995] 4 S.C.R. 707; 190 N.R. 161; 178 A.R. 161; 110 W.A.C. 161; 103 C.C.C.(3d) 262, refd to. [para. 13].

R. v. Gordon (B.) et al. (1998), 80 O.T.C. 241 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 15].

R. v. Kalanj; R. v. Pion, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1594; 96 N.R. 191; 48 C.C.C.(3d) 459, refd to. [para. 17].

R. v. W.K.L., [1991] 1 S.C.R. 1091; 124 N.R. 146; [1991] 4 W.W.R. 385; 64 C.C.C.(3d) 321; 6 C.R.(4th) 1; 4 C.R.R.(2d) 298, refd to. [para. 19].

R. v. Halcrow (V.A.) (1993), 24 B.C.A.C. 197; 40 W.A.C. 197; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 320 (C.A.), affd. [1995] 1 S.C.R. 440; 179 N.R. 63; 55 B.C.A.C. 72; 90 W.A.C. 72; 95 C.C.C.(3d) 94, refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. R.A.D. (1993), 25 B.C.A.C. 206; 43 W.A.C. 206; 80 C.C.C.(3d) 97 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Stymiest (C.W.W.) (1993), 22 B.C.A.C. 133; 38 W.A.C. 133; 79 C.C.C.(3d) 408 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Fagan (R.J.) (1998), 115 B.C.A.C. 106; 189 W.A.C. 106 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 22].

R. v. Stinchcombe (1994), 149 A.R. 167; 63 W.A.C. 167; 88 C.C.C.(3d) 557 (C.A.), affd. [1995] 1 S.C.R. 754; 178 N.R. 157; 162 A.R. 269; 83 W.A.C. 269; 38 C.R.(4th) 42, refd to. [para. 26].

R. v. Carosella (N.), [1997] 1 S.C.R. 80; 207 N.R. 321; 98 O.A.C. 81; 112 C.C.C.(3d) 289, refd to. [para. 27].

R. v. La (H.K.) et al., [1997] 2 S.C.R. 680; 213 N.R. 1; 200 A.R. 81; 146 W.A.C. 81; 116 C.C.C.(3d) 97, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Egger (J.H.), [1993] 2 S.C.R. 451; 153 N.R. 272; 141 A.R. 81; 46 W.A.C. 81; 82 C.C.C.(3d) 193, refd to. [para. 28].

R. v. Murray (S.H.) (1994), 75 O.A.C. 10 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 30].

R. v. Lupien (R.) (1995), 68 Q.A.C. 253 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Penney, [1998] H.C.A. 51 (Aust. H.C.), refd to. [para. 31].

R. v. Bowler (R.L.) (1998), 80 O.T.C. 181 (Gen. Div.), refd to. [para. 32].

R. v. Desmond (1988), 88 N.S.R.(2d) 175; 225 A.P.R. 175; 46 C.C.C.(3d) 37 (T.D.), refd to. [para. 33].

Counsel:

M. Braun, for the Crown;

G.K. Gill, for the accused.

This application was heard on April 12, 1999, at Chilliwack, British Columbia, by Romilly, J., of the British Columbia Supreme Court, who delivered the following judgment on April 13, 1999.