R. v. Gillespie

R. v. Gillespie

The accused's statement "I need a lawyer" constituted an invocation of s.10(b); police failed to give the required supplementary Prosper warning and failed to provide assistance to contact counsel; Crown did not prove a clear and unequivocal waiver; therefore the police breached s.10(b) and the statements (video and...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
2004 BCSC 838
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Kenneth Wayne Gillespie
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
8 June 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sexual Assault / Voir Dire
Outcome
Voir dire: statement found inadmissible; video and transcript excluded from trial.
Legal Topics
Right to Counsel, Prosper Warning, Charter S.10(b), Exclusion of Evidence S.24(2)
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Evidence Right to Counsel Prosper Warning Charter S.10(b) Exclusion of Evidence S.24(2)

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

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

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Kenneth Wayne Gillespie

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sexual Assault / Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did the accused invoke his right to counsel under s.10(b)?
  2. 2 Did police breach s.10(b) by failing to give the supplementary Prosper warning and by eliciting statements before the accused consulted counsel?
  3. 3 Was there a clear and unequivocal waiver of the right to counsel by the accused?

Ratio Decidendi

The accused's statement "I need a lawyer" constituted an invocation of s.10(b); police failed to give the required supplementary Prosper warning and failed to provide assistance to contact counsel; Crown did not prove a clear and unequivocal waiver; therefore the police breached s.10(b) and the statements (video and transcript) are inadmissible under s.24(2).

Court Disposition

Voir dire: statement found inadmissible; video and transcript excluded from trial.

Orders

  • The video recording and transcript (Exhibits A and B) are excluded from evidence at trial.