Section 11(c): Self Incrimination
R. v. Bartle, [1994] 3 S.C.R. 173
R. v. Bartle established a positive duty on the part of police officers to provide detained persons with an opportunity to exercise their right to retain and instruct counsel. In this case, police officers informed Mr. Bartle of his right to counsel when they took him into custody for suspected impaired driving, but failed to advise him of a toll-free number that he could call to speak with a duty counsel lawyer. Continue reading
R. v. Hebert, [1990] 2 SCR 151
In R. v. Hebert, the Supreme Court of Canada defined the scope and nature of the right to remain silent. The accused, Neil Gerald Hebert, was arrested on a charge of robbery and indicated that he did not wish to speak with the police. An undercover police officer was then placed in his cell, posing as another suspect under arrest. Mr. Hebert spoke to this individual and made numerous incriminating statements. Continue reading