R. v. Sandeson

R. v. Sandeson

All statements made by the accused on August 18 and 19, 2015 were voluntary and therefore admissible for the preliminary inquiry because (1) Sgt. Keddy's reassurance was not an inducement that overbore the accused's will, (2) the late evening D/Cst. Sayer interview was not oppressive and did not impair capacity, (3) although the Cst. Allison interrogation produced severe emotional distress, the accused retained an operating mind, was capable of choice, and no impermissible inducements or oppressive conditions (including access to counsel issues governed by Sinclair) rendered his statements involuntary.

Citation
2016 NSPC 17
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: William Michael Sandeson
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 March 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Preliminary Inquiry Statement Voir Dire
Outcome
All challenged statements admitted as voluntary and admissible for committal
Legal Topics
Voluntariness of Statements, Confessions Rule, Inducement and Oppression, Operating Mind, Access to Counsel (s.10(b)), Admissibility at Committal
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Charter Rights (right to Counsel) Voluntariness of Statements Confessions Rule Inducement and Oppression Operating Mind Access to Counsel (s.10(b)) +1 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 7 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

William Michael Sandeson

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Preliminary Inquiry Statement Voir Dire

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether statements made August 18-19, 2015 were voluntary
  2. 2 Whether assurances by Sgt. Keddy constituted impermissible inducement
  3. 3 Whether interrogation techniques and conditions amounted to oppression

Ratio Decidendi

All statements made by the accused on August 18 and 19, 2015 were voluntary and therefore admissible for the preliminary inquiry because (1) Sgt. Keddy's reassurance was not an inducement that overbore the accused's will, (2) the late evening D/Cst. Sayer interview was not oppressive and did not impair capacity, (3) although the Cst. Allison interrogation produced severe emotional distress, the accused retained an operating mind, was capable of choice, and no impermissible inducements or oppressive conditions (including access to counsel issues governed by Sinclair) rendered his statements involuntary.

Court Disposition

All challenged statements admitted as voluntary and admissible for committal

Orders

  • All statements made by William Michael Sandeson to police on August 18 and 19, 2015 are admissible evidence at the preliminary inquiry