R. v. Thompson

R. v. Thompson

Where a false statement to police in relation to a homicide directly and consequentially prolonged an investigation and thereby caused additional emotional harm to family members, those family members fall within the Criminal Code definition of "victim" and may file victim impact statements for sentencing, but such statements must be confined to harms arising from the accused's misleading conduct and not the homicide for which the accused is not responsible.

Citation
2017 NSPC 7
Parties
Crown: Her Majesty the Queen; Accused: Caitlin Faye Thompson
Court
Nova Scotia Provincial Court
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
9 March 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Public Mischief (s.140(1)(b) Criminal Code) / Sentencing Decision on Admissibility of Victim Impact Statements (pre Sentencing)
Outcome
Allowed in part: Victim impact statements from Jane Penney and Rachel Maher are admissible for sentencing but must be limited to emotional harm caused by Ms. Thompson's misleading of the police; non‑compliant material will be edited.
Legal Topics
Victim Impact Statements, Definition of "victim", Public Mischief, Scope of Victim Participation at Sentencing
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Sentencing Victims Law Procedural Law Victim Impact Statements Definition of "victim" Public Mischief Scope of Victim Participation at Sentencing

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 4 Authorities cited 7 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 (s.140(1)(b) Criminal Code) / Sentencing Decision on Admissibility of Victim Impact Statements (pre Sentencing)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether persons affected by a false statement to police in a public mischief offence qualify as "victims" under the Criminal Code for the purposes of s.722 victim impact statements
  2. 2 Whether victim impact statements from family/friends may address harms arising from the underlying homicide rather than only harms caused by the accused's misleading conduct
  3. 3 How to construe s.2 definition of "victim" and its application to administration of justice offences

Ratio Decidendi

Where a false statement to police in relation to a homicide directly and consequentially prolonged an investigation and thereby caused additional emotional harm to family members, those family members fall within the Criminal Code definition of "victim" and may file victim impact statements for sentencing, but such statements must be confined to harms arising from the accused's misleading conduct and not the homicide for which the accused is not responsible.

Court Disposition

Allowed in part: Victim impact statements from Jane Penney and Rachel Maher are admissible for sentencing but must be limited to emotional harm caused by Ms. Thompson's misleading of the police; non‑compliant material will be edited.

Orders

  • Victim impact statements from Jane Penney and Rachel Maher are permitted to be filed for the sentencing of Caitlin Faye Thompson scheduled March 9, 2017.
  • Victim impact statements must be strictly confined to the impact of Ms. Thompson's false statements on the police investigation; any material addressing the homicide or harms for which Ms. Thompson is not responsible will be edited or redacted.