To support us, please follow us wherever you're listening and visit our website to provide feedback.
Criminal law — Appeals — Acquittal
Criminal law — Murder — Elements of offence — Mens rea
Criminal law — Defences — Self‑defence
(00:00:33) Facts and Procedural History
(00:01:41) Per Per Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Martin, Kasirer, Jamal, O’Bonsawin and Moreau JJ.
(00:09:38) Joint Reasons for Judgment: Martin and Moreau JJ. (Wagner C.J. and Karakatsanis, Côté, Kasirer, Jamal and O’Bonsawin JJ. concurring)
(00:09:51) I. Introduction – 1
(00:15:25) III. Judgments Below – 10
(00:15:27) A. Nunavut Court of Justice (Charlesworth J.) – 10
(00:18:49) B. Nunavut Court of Appeal, 2022 NUCA 9 (Schutz, Campbell and Pentelechuk JJ.A.) – 14
(00:20:25) IV. Issues – 18
(00:20:51) A. What Does It Mean That a Crown Appeal of an Acquittal Under Section 676(1)(a) of the Criminal Code Is Limited to a Ground of Appeal That Involves a Question of Law Alone? – 19
(00:22:30) (1) Historical Foundations of the Crown’s Limited Right of Appeal – 22
(00:25:04) (2) Rationales for the Crown’s Limited Right of Appeal – 26
(00:27:29) (3) Defining the Scope of the Crown’s Limited Right of Appeal – 32
(00:30:31) (4) Failure to Articulate an Error of Law for the Mens Rea for Murder – 37
(00:35:43) B. Did the Trial Judge Err in Law Regarding the Mens Rea for Second Degree Murder? – 45
(00:36:53) (1) The Legal Test for Mens Rea – 47
(00:45:22) (2) No Error of Law in Respect of Lemmon and Cooper – 59
(00:49:03) (3) Did the Trial Judge Err in Law in Failing to Consider the Common Sense Inference? – 65
(00:51:37) C. Did the Trial Judge Err in Law in Relation to Self-Defence? – 70
(01:03:27) V. Disposition – 83
(01:03:34) Concurring Reasons: Rowe J.