R. v. Thompson

R. v. Thompson

The accused's intentionally misleading statement, as part of a collaborative false narrative, contributed to police continuing investigative steps focused on where the victim had gone from 3 Springhill Road and therefore satisfied the causation element of public mischief under s.140(1)(b); conviction entered.

Citation
2016 NSPC 77
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Caitlin Faye Thompson
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
16 December 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Public Mischief / Trial Decision
Outcome
Guilty
Legal Topics
Public Mischief, False Statements to Police, Causation in Police Investigations, Police Investigative Procedure
Source Language
English

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Caitlin Faye Thompson

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Public Mischief / Trial Decision

  1. 1 Whether the accused's false statement caused police to continue the investigation
  2. 2 Whether multiple collaborators providing the same false story negates individual criminal responsibility
  3. 3 Whether the Crown must prove the accused was the substantial cause of investigative steps

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's intentionally misleading statement, as part of a collaborative false narrative, contributed to police continuing investigative steps focused on where the victim had gone from 3 Springhill Road and therefore satisfied the causation element of public mischief under s.140(1)(b); conviction entered.

Court Disposition

Guilty

Orders

  • Convicted of public mischief contrary to s.140(1)(b) of the Criminal Code; conviction entered