R. v. Thatcher, (1986) 46 Sask.R. 241 (CA)
Judge | Bayda, C.J.S., Brownridge, Hall, Tallis and Vancise, JJ.A. |
Court | Court of Appeal (Saskatchewan) |
Case Date | January 17, 1986 |
Jurisdiction | Saskatchewan |
Citations | (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241 (CA);1986 CanLII 159 (SK CA);[1986] 2 WWR 97;24 CCC (3d) 449;46 Sask R 241 |
R. v. Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241 (CA)
MLB headnote and full text
R. v. Thatcher
(No. 1805)
Indexed As: R. v. Thatcher
Saskatchewan Court of Appeal
Bayda, C.J.S., Brownridge, Hall, Tallis and Vancise, JJ.A.
January 17, 1986.
Summary:
The accused was convicted of murder by a jury. The accused appealed.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal. Vancise, J.A., dissenting, would have allowed the appeal, set aside the conviction and ordered a new trial.
Criminal Law - Topic 1265
Murder - Jury charge - Principal offender v. party - A judge at a murder trial instructed the jury that the accused could be found guilty either as the principal offender under s. 21(1)(a) of the Criminal Code, or, as a party to the offence under ss. 21(1)(b) or (c) of the Code - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed these instructions to the jury and held that the jury was properly charged - See paragraphs 173 to 179.
Criminal Law - Topic 1265
Murder - Jury charge - Unanimity and disagreement - A judge at a murder trial instructed a jury that they could find the accused guilty either as the principal offender or as a party, but did not instruct the jury that they had to be unanimous in their conclusion as to the way in which the murder was committed - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the judge did not err in his instructions, where he was not obliged to direct on unanimity because the jury was entitled to reach a unanimous verdict by separate paths of reasoning - See paragraphs 180 to 186.
Criminal Law - Topic 1265
Murder - Jury charge - Fairness and adequacy of - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed whether a trial judge's charge to a jury in a murder case was fair and adequate and held that if there were any errors, there was no prejudice to the accused - See paragraphs 192 to 211.
Criminal Law - Topic 2759
Parties - Jury charge - Murder - A judge at a murder trial instructed the jury that the accused could be found guilty either as the principal offender under s. 21(1)(a) of the Criminal Code or as a party to the offence under ss. 21(1)(b) or (c) of the Code - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed these instructions and held that the jury was properly charged - See paragraphs 173 to 179.
Criminal Law - Topic 2759
Parties - Jury charge - Murder - Unanimity and disagreement - A judge at a murder trial instructed a jury that they could find the accused guilty either as the principal offender or as a party, but did not instruct the jury that they had to be unanimous in their conclusion as to the way in which the murder was committed - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the judge did not err in his instructions, where he was not obliged to direct on unanimity because the jury was entitled to reach a unanimous verdict by separate paths of reasoning - See paragraphs 180 to 186.
Criminal Law - Topic 4351
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding reasonable doubt - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal examined a jury charge at a murder trial on the issues of presumption of innocence and reasonable doubt and held that if there were any errors in the charge, there was no prejudice to the accused and would if necessary apply s. 613(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code - See paragraphs 187 to 191.
Criminal Law - Topic 4358
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding circumstantial evidence - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed a judge's charge at a murder trial respecting circumstantial evidence and held that the charge was proper - See paragraphs 214 to 217.
Criminal Law - Topic 4364
Procedure - Jury charge - Directions regarding unanimity and disagreement - A judge at a murder trial instructed a jury that they could find the accused guilty either as the principal offender or as a party, but did not instruct the jury that they had to be unanimous in their conclusion as to the way in which the murder was committed - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the judge did not err in his instructions because he was not obliged to direct on unanimity because the jury was entitled to reach a unanimous verdict by separate paths of reasoning - See paragraphs 180 to 186.
Criminal Law - Topic 4570
Procedure - Conduct of trial - Reopening of trial to hear additional evidence - A judge at a murder trial allowed the Crown to re-open its case to call a witness who only surfaced as a potential witness during the trial - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal held that the trial judge was justified in allowing the Crown to reopen its case where, inter alia, the witness's evidence was relevant to the motive for the killing - See paragraphs 212, 213.
Criminal Law - Topic 4970
Appeals - Indictable offences - Powers of court of appeal - Receiving fresh evidence - General - The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal referred to a test to determine when fresh evidence is admissible on appeal - The court refused to admit fresh evidence on appeal where the criteria of the test were not met - See paragraphs 220 to 223.
Criminal Law - Topic 5041
Appeals - Indictable offences - Dismissal of appeal if error resulted in no miscarriage of justice - Where jury charge incomplete or in error - Murder - A judge of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal discussed the applicability of s. 613(1)(b)(iii) where an accused convicted of murder appealed, alleging that the trial judge's charge to the jury was inadequate - See paragraphs 337 to 344.
Cases Noticed:
R. v. Govedarov, Popovic and Askov (1974), 16 C.C.C.(2d) 238, refd to. [para. 175].
R. v. Farrant, [1983] 1 S.C.R. 124; 46 N.R. 337, refd to. [paras. 176 and 181].
R. v. Isaac, [1984] 1 S.C.R. 74; 51 N.R. 308, refd to. [para. 178].
R. v. Sparrow (1979), 51 C.C.C.(2d) 443, refd to. [para. 178].
R. v. Tuckey, Baynham and Walsh (1985), 9 O.A.C. 218; 46 C.R.(3d) 97 (O.C.A.), refd to. [para. 183].
R. v. Bouvier, 11 C.C.C.(3d) 257, refd to. [paras. 184 and 216].
R. v. Nimchuk, 33 C.C.C.(2d) 209, refd to. [para. 190].
R. v. Nadeau, [1984] 2 S.C.R. 570; 56 N.R. 130, refd to. [paras. 190 and 330].
R. v. Demeter (1976), 25 C.C.C.(2d) 417, aff'd. [1978] 1 S.C.R. 538; 16 N.R. 46, refd to. [para. 190].
R. v. Gill, [1963] 1 All E.R. 688, refd to. [para. 190].
Cowan v. R., [1962] S.C.R. 476, refd to. [para. 195].
R. v. Morgantaler et al., 11 O.A.C. 81, refd to. [para. 195].
R. v. Linney, [1978] 1 S.C.R. 646; 13 N.R. 217, refd to. [paras. 197 and 332].
R. v. Sargent, 22 Sask.R. 230; 5 C.C.C.(3d) 429, refd to. [para. 198].
R. v. Vetrovec, [1982] 1 S.C.R. 811; 41 N.R. 606, refd to. [para. 203].
R. v. Boucher, [1955] S.C.R. 16, refd to. [para. 211].
R. v. Lemay (1952), 102 C.C.C. 1, refd to. [para. 211].
R. v. Burr, 43 Sask.R. 183, refd to. [para. 211].
R. v. Robillard, [1978] 2 S.C.R. 728; 21 N.R. 557; 41 C.C.C.(2d) 1, refd to. [para. 212].
Lewis v. R. (1979), 47 C.C.C.(2d) 24, refd to. [para. 213].
R. v. Cooper (1977), 14 N.R. 181; 34 C.C.C.(2d) 18, refd to. [para. 216].
R. v. Palmer, [1980] 1 S.C.R. 759; 30 N.R. 181; 50 C.C.C.(2d) 193, refd to. [para. 222].
Sparrow v. R., 12 C.R.(3d) 158 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 279].
R. v. Dick (1946), 87 C.C.C. 101 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 289].
R. v. Maxwell (1975), 26 C.C.C.(2d) 322 (Ont. C.A.), refd to. [para. 291].
Bray v. Ford, [1896] A.C. 44 (H.L.), refd to. [para. 300].
Spencer v. Alaska Packers Association (1904), 35 S.C.R. 362, refd to. [para. 301].
R. v. Theriault, [1981] 1 S.C.R. 336; 19 N.R. 361, refd to. [paras. 302 and 325].
Azoulay v. R., [1952] 2 S.C.R. 495; 104 C.C.C. 97; 15 C.R. 181, refd to. [para. 302].
Kelsey v. R., [1953] 1 S.C.R. 220; 105 C.C.C. 97; 16 C.R. 119, refd to. [para. 302].
Lizotte v. R., [1953] 1 S.C.R. 411; 106 C.C.C. 1; 16 C.R. 281, refd to. [para. 302].
R. v. Clayton-Wright (1948), 30 C.R. App. Rep. 22, refd to. [para. 303].
R. v. Cavanagh and Donaldson (1976), 33 C.C.C.(2d) 134, refd to. [para. 323].
R. v. Nykiforuk (1946), 2 C.R. 41 (Sask. C.A.), refd to. [para. 330].
Allen v. R. (1911), 44 S.C.R. 331; 18 C.C.C. 1, refd to. [para. 338].
Brooks v. R., [1927] S.C.R. 633; [1928] 1 D.L.R. 268; 48 C.C.C. 333, refd to. [para. 339].
Colpitts v. R., [1965] S.C.R. 739; 52 D.L.R.(2d) 416, refd to. [para. 340].
Statutes Noticed:
Criminal Code of Canada, R.S.C. 1970, c. C-34, sect. 21(1), sect. 214.
Authors and Works Noticed:
Williams, Glanville, Alternative Elements and Included Offences (1984), 43 Cambridge L. J. 290, at pp. 291, 292 [paras. 182, 297].
Counsel:
Gerald N. Allbright, Q.C., M.P. Bodnar, and F.M. Brayford, for Thatcher;
Serge Kujawa, Q.C., and D. Murray Brown, for the Crown.
This appeal was heard before Bayda, C.J.S., Brownridge, Hall, Tallis and Vancise, JJ.A., of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal.
The decision of the Court of Appeal was delivered on January 17, 1986, and the following opinions were filed:
Tallis, J.A. (Bayda, C.J.S. and Brownridge, J.A., concurring) - see paragraphs 1 to 224;
Hall, J.A. - see paragraphs 225 to 231;
Vancise, J.A., dissenting - see paragraphs 232 to 345.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
R. v. Pan (R.W.), (1999) 120 O.A.C. 1 (CA)
...[paras. 141, 368, footnote 14]. R. v. Tavarivas, [1993] B.C.J. No. 2820 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 141, footnote 15]. R. v. Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 449 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 657; 75 N.R. 198; 57 Sask.R. 113; 32 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 141, footnote 16......
-
The Trial Process
...v Brodie that the indictment must lift the charge “from 79 Section 587(3)(c). 80 JAH , above note 75. 81 Vézina , above note 57. 82 (1986), 24 CCC (3d) 449 (Sask CA) [ Thatcher ], quoting from R v Govedarov, Popovic and Askov (1974), 16 CCC (2d) 238 (Ont CA). 83 [1978] 1 SCR 8 at 13 [ Côté ......
-
Table of cases
...442 R v TGH, 2014 ONCA 460 .................................................................................. 342 R v Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask R 241, 24 CCC (3d) 449, [1986] SJ No 19 (CA) .............................................................................. 499, 504, 534 R v Theren......
-
R. v. M.B.P., (1994) 165 N.R. 321 (SCC)
...58]. 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. 58]. R. v. Thatcher, [1986] 2 W.W.R. 97; 46 Sask.R. 241 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 652; 75 N.R. 198; 57 Sask.R. 113, refd to. [para. R. v. Karens, [1986] B.C.J. No. 2165 (Co......
-
R. v. Pan (R.W.), (1999) 120 O.A.C. 1 (CA)
...[paras. 141, 368, footnote 14]. R. v. Tavarivas, [1993] B.C.J. No. 2820 (B.C.S.C.), refd to. [para. 141, footnote 15]. R. v. Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 449 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 657; 75 N.R. 198; 57 Sask.R. 113; 32 C.C.C.(3d) 481, refd to. [para. 141, footnote 16......
-
R. v. M.B.P., (1994) 165 N.R. 321 (SCC)
...58]. 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. 58]. R. v. Thatcher, [1986] 2 W.W.R. 97; 46 Sask.R. 241 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 652; 75 N.R. 198; 57 Sask.R. 113, refd to. [para. R. v. Karens, [1986] B.C.J. No. 2165 (Co......
-
R. v. S.G.G., (1997) 214 N.R. 161 (SCC)
...- Testimony respecting the accused - Character of accused - General - [See Criminal Law - Topic 4379 ]. Cases Noticed: R. v. Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241; 24 C.C.C.(3d) 449 (C.A.), affd. [1987] 1 S.C.R. 652; 75 N.R. 198; 57 Sask.R. 113; [1987] 4 W.W.R. 193; 57 C.R.(3d) 97; 32 C.C.C.(3d) ......
-
R. v. Dickhoff (K.J.), (1998) 172 Sask.R. 1 (CA)
...refd to. [para. 37, footnote 32]. R. v. Cathro (1956), 113 C.C.C. 225 (S.C.C.), refd to. [para. 37, footnote 32]. R. v. Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask.R. 241 (C.A.), refd to. [para. 37, footnote R. v. St. Pierre (1981), 63 C.C.C.(2d) 258 (Que. C.A.), refd to. [para. 44, footnote 35]. R. v. Shrops......
-
Table of cases
...442 R v TGH, 2014 ONCA 460 .................................................................................. 342 R v Thatcher (1986), 46 Sask R 241, 24 CCC (3d) 449, [1986] SJ No 19 (CA) .............................................................................. 499, 504, 534 R v Theren......
-
The Trial Process
...v Brodie that the indictment must lift the charge “from 79 Section 587(3)(c). 80 JAH , above note 75. 81 Vézina , above note 57. 82 (1986), 24 CCC (3d) 449 (Sask CA) [ Thatcher ], quoting from R v Govedarov, Popovic and Askov (1974), 16 CCC (2d) 238 (Ont CA). 83 [1978] 1 SCR 8 at 13 [ Côté ......