R. v. Rochon, 2003 CanLII 9600 (ON CA)
[53] Section 21(1)(c) defines party liability in terms of a person who “abets” another person who commits the offence. Both in the charge and in the recharge, the trial judge used the word “support” as part of the definition of “abet”.
[56] First, the trial judge did not use only the word “support” in defining “abet”. Indeed, the principal word he used was “encourage”. As I read his charge, his references to the definition of “abet” were: “whether . . . she provided guidance or encouragement to Rochon”; “abetting means to encourage or to support”; “An abettor may encourage or lend moral support to the principal offender”; “it would make her a party to the offence, just the same as Rochon, if you find that she provided guidance and counselling”; “was she counselling him”; “if she intended to counsel or guide Rochon”; and “if she intended . . . to encourage or support Rochon”. When I examine the phraseology employed by the trial judge, particularly in the context of his review of the evidence, it seems clear that the jury would have understood that it could find Bonnie liable as an abettor only if it was convinced that she played an active role in encouraging Rochon to commit the offence.
[57] Second, I do not think that the word “support” is impermissible in the context of a proper definition of “abet” in s. 21(1)(c). Indeed, there are many cases in which appellate courts have approved a formulation employing the linkage of “encourage” and “support”: see, for example, R. v. E. (L.) (1994), 1994 CanLII 1785 (ON CA), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 228 at 247 (Ont. C.A.); R. v. Rhyno (1944), 1944 CanLII 449 (NS SC), 83 C.C.C. 186 at 189 (N.S.S.C.); and R. v. Vinette, 1968 CanLII 820 (BC CA), [1969] 3 C.C.C. 172 at 174 (B.C.C.A.).
[58] Third, it is important to note that the word “support” has many meanings. In The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993) the definition of the verb “support” covers almost a full page and is divided into seven principal meanings, including “Strengthen the position of (a person . . .) by one’s assistance or backing”, “give confidence or strength to; encourage” and “Occupy a position by the side of (a person) in order to give assistance or encouragement”. In my view, these definitions of the word “support” clearly imply an element of action; indeed, they tend to treat “support” and “encourage” almost as synonyms.
[59] Combining these three reasons, the crucial point, in my view, is to examine the trial judge’s charge relating to s. 21(1)(c) in its entirety. When I do that, I am certain that the words the trial judge employed – encourage, guide, counsel, support – and his review of the evidence would have left the jury with the proper understanding that Bonnie could be found liable under s. 21(1)(c) only if she played an active role in promoting the crime committed by her son.
Aucun commentaire:
Publier un commentaire