R. v. Ward

R. v. Ward

On the balance of probabilities the accused is unfit to stand trial because his testimony, corroborating information from his substitute decision maker and the record establish he cannot reliably understand the nature and object of the proceedings or the possible consequences, nor can he reliably instruct counsel; expert opinion to the contrary was undermined by methodological deficiencies and lack of corroborative consultation, therefore the court finds unfitness and refers the matter to the Criminal Code Review Board under s.672.45.

Citation
2021 NSPC 43
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Francis Constantine Ward
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
29 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Fitness Hearing / Pre Trial Fitness Determination
Outcome
Accused found unfit to stand trial; matter referred to the Criminal Code Review Board.
Legal Topics
Fitness to Stand Trial, Not Criminally Responsible (ncr), Referral to Review Board, Expert Psychiatric Evidence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Mental Health Law Procedural Law Fitness to Stand Trial Not Criminally Responsible (ncr) Referral to Review Board Expert Psychiatric Evidence

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 6 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Her Majesty the Queen

Crown

Francis Constantine Ward

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal Fitness Hearing / Pre Trial Fitness Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused is unfit to stand trial under section 2 of the Criminal Code of Canada
  2. 2 Whether the accused understands the nature and object of the proceedings and possible consequences and can communicate with counsel
  3. 3 The weight and adequacy of psychiatric expert evidence in fitness determinations

Ratio Decidendi

On the balance of probabilities the accused is unfit to stand trial because his testimony, corroborating information from his substitute decision maker and the record establish he cannot reliably understand the nature and object of the proceedings or the possible consequences, nor can he reliably instruct counsel; expert opinion to the contrary was undermined by methodological deficiencies and lack of corroborative consultation, therefore the court finds unfitness and refers the matter to the Criminal Code Review Board under s.672.45.

Court Disposition

Accused found unfit to stand trial; matter referred to the Criminal Code Review Board.

Orders

  • Accused declared unfit to stand trial.
  • Matter referred to the Criminal Code Review Board pursuant to section 672.45 of the Criminal Code of Canada together with a transcript of the proceedings and all documents filed in relation to this matter.