R. v. Gareau

R. v. Gareau

Given the cumulative 17-year delay, two prior convictions overturned for legal error, the serious and unique prejudice to the accused's capacity to mount a defence (fading memories, rehearsal of testimony, and a high-profile Crown witness who has publicized the case), and the resultant harm to public confidence in the integrity of the justice system, no remedy short of a permanent stay could secure a fair trial or dissociate the system from the impugned circumstances; therefore a stay of proceedings was required to prevent abuse of process.

Citation
2018 NSSC 27
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Steven Gareau
Court
Supreme Court of Nova Scotia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
21 February 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal (first Degree Murder; Conspiracy) / Pre Trial Applications — Stay of Proceedings (abuse of Process)
Outcome
Stay of proceedings granted; third trial prohibited as an abuse of process
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Stay of Proceedings, Delay (jordan Framework), Right to Fair Trial, Vetrovec Witnesses, Multiple Retrials, Disclosure
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Procedural Law Evidence Abuse of Process Stay of Proceedings Delay (jordan Framework) Right to Fair Trial +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Steven Gareau

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal (first Degree Murder; Conspiracy) / Pre Trial Applications — Stay of Proceedings (abuse of Process)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceeding with a third trial would amount to an abuse of process under s.7 of the Charter
  2. 2 Whether delay and consecutive failed trials have prejudiced the accused's s.7 and s.11(b) rights
  3. 3 Whether alternatives to a stay can cure prejudice to trial fairness or the integrity of the justice system

Ratio Decidendi

Given the cumulative 17-year delay, two prior convictions overturned for legal error, the serious and unique prejudice to the accused's capacity to mount a defence (fading memories, rehearsal of testimony, and a high-profile Crown witness who has publicized the case), and the resultant harm to public confidence in the integrity of the justice system, no remedy short of a permanent stay could secure a fair trial or dissociate the system from the impugned circumstances; therefore a stay of proceedings was required to prevent abuse of process.

Court Disposition

Stay of proceedings granted; third trial prohibited as an abuse of process

Orders

  • A permanent stay of proceedings is ordered to prevent a third trial (stay entered)
  • Proceedings for a third retrial scheduled April 3–June 1, 2018 are stayed