Un individu détenu au poste de police ne perd pas automatiquement sa capacité d'exercer son choix d'aller en salle d'interrogatoire et de parler ou non au policier

R v Saretzky, 2020 ABCA 421

Lien vers la décision

[47]           That is a significant factor as he had obviously lost his liberty and his movements within the institution were strictly controlled. However, while his incarceration provides important context, it does not answer the relevant question, which is whether the appellant’s freedom to choose to meet and talk with the officer was lost or impaired. In the unique circumstances of this case, the appellant’s refusal to meet with the officer when invited to do so only two months before, and the repeated advice that he need not stay or talk but could return to his cell if and when he wished, overcame any suggestion that his being an inmate denied him the freedom of choice to leave the interview room and return to his cell: see R v Wood, 1992 ABCA 27 at paras 19-20;  R v Heppner, 2019 BCCA 108 at para 68.