R. v. Aitken

R. v. Aitken

A voir dire on the intercepts is required; limited amplification and cross-examination are permitted only where there is a reasonable likelihood the evidence will discredit statutory preconditions. The accused is granted leave to cross-examine Constables Sandhu and Harper solely on the reliability and disclosure concerning specified informants (the Giesbrecht sisters and Mr Fraser) and to play Mr Fraser's interview tape; attempts to expand cross-examination or call other witnesses to challenge peripheral or ultimate proof issues are denied. Investigative necessity is to be assessed on the material before the authorizing judge.

Citation
2008 BCSC 1912
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Daniel Christopher Miles Aitken
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
18 March 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal First Degree Murder / Pre Trial Applications and Voir Dire on Wiretap Authorizations (application #2)
Outcome
Voir dire granted with limited amplification; partial leave to cross-examine affiants granted; broader evidentiary requests refused
Legal Topics
Wiretap Authorizations S.186 Criminal Code, Reasonable and Probable Grounds, Investigative Necessity, Voir Dire Procedure (garofoli Review), Informant Reliability, Cross Examination of Affiants
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Investigative Warrants Privacy and Communications Interception Wiretap Authorizations S.186 Criminal Code Reasonable and Probable Grounds Investigative Necessity Voir Dire Procedure (garofoli Review) +2 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 6 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Daniel Christopher Miles Aitken

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal First Degree Murder / Pre Trial Applications and Voir Dire on Wiretap Authorizations (application #2)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a voir dire should be held to determine admissibility of intercepted communications
  2. 2 Whether the accused should be granted leave to cross-examine affiants (Constables Sandhu and Harper) on the wiretap authorizations
  3. 3 Whether the accused may adduce additional evidence (witnesses, tapes, documents) on the voir dire

Ratio Decidendi

A voir dire on the intercepts is required; limited amplification and cross-examination are permitted only where there is a reasonable likelihood the evidence will discredit statutory preconditions. The accused is granted leave to cross-examine Constables Sandhu and Harper solely on the reliability and disclosure concerning specified informants (the Giesbrecht sisters and Mr Fraser) and to play Mr Fraser's interview tape; attempts to expand cross-examination or call other witnesses to challenge peripheral or ultimate proof issues are denied. Investigative necessity is to be assessed on the material before the authorizing judge.

Court Disposition

Voir dire granted with limited amplification; partial leave to cross-examine affiants granted; broader evidentiary requests refused

Orders

  • Voir dire ordered to determine admissibility of approximately 200 intercepted communications obtained under seven wiretap authorizations
  • Accused granted leave to cross-examine Constables Sandhu and Harper limited to the reliability and disclosure regarding the Giesbrecht sisters and Mr Fraser and the lead-up to Mr Fraser's interview