Quels sont les facteurs pertinents à l'appréciation de la culpabilité morale d'un contrevenant?

R. v. C.K., 2023 BCCA 468 

Lien vers la décision

[71]      Assessing an offender’s personal responsibility for a crime must consider the offender’s state of mind and acts at the time of the offence: R. v. M. (C.A.), [1996] 1 S.C.R. 500 at para. 79, 1996 CanLII 230. Relevant factors include: the level of planning and/or intentionality brought to the crime; the degree, nature and extent of the offender’s personal participation in the offence; the means or method by which the crime was committed; the motive or reasons for the offender’s participation; the offender’s awareness of the legal and moral wrongfulness of their conduct; their awareness of the actual or reasonably foreseeable harms flowing from their conduct (immediate and long-term); and their persistence in perpetrating the offence despite that awareness. See, for example, R. v. Okimaw, 2016 ABCA 246 at para. 85 and R. v. Vader, 2019 ABCA 488 at para. 16.

[72]      Undoubtedly, there may be aspects of an offender’s background that attenuate their moral culpability. As explained in R. v. Hills, 2023 SCC 2:

[58]        … The offender’s moral culpability or degree of responsibility should be measured by gauging the essential substantive elements of the offence including the offence’s mens rea, the offender’s conduct in the commission of the offence, the offender’s motive for committing the offence, and aspects of the offender’s background that increase or decrease the offender’s individual responsibility for the crime, including the offender’s personal circumstances and mental capacity …

[Internal references omitted.]