L'article 10b) de la Charte ne permet pas à l'accusé de connaître la preuve qu'à la police contre lui, mais prescrit seulement de l'informer de son droit à l'avocat et de lui permettre de l'exercer si demandé

R v Briscoe, 2015 ABCA 2 

Lien vers la décision

[47]           The object of s. 10(b) of the Charter is to ensure a level legal terrain for the detainee: R v Latimer, 1997 CanLII 405 (SCC), [1997] 1 SCR 217 at para.28. As pointed out in Sinclair at para. 24: “The purpose of s. 10(b) is to provide a detainee with an opportunity to obtain legal advice relevant to his legal situation. [Emphasis added.]” This Court in R v M(AR), 2011 ABCA 98 at para. 38, 283 CCC (3d) 89, leave denied [2012] SCCA No 84 (QL) described three types of triggers to repeat the Charter advisement, but all of them relate to the legal position (notably legal jeopardy) of the detainee, which in turn relate to the purpose of s. 10(b) of the Charter in the first place.

[48]           This leveling of legal terrain is not the same thing as dictating a guaranteed Constitutional right of the detainee to appreciate his evidential situation when he intersects with the police. Apart from the category of cases where the detainee demonstrates no initial understanding of the right in the first instance and it must be re-explained, the other two categories of second chance cases in M(AR) relate to (a) some “new and serious turn” respecting the charges faced by the detainee hence affecting the person’s legal jeopardy, or (b) some special form of evidence gathering situation which significantly differs from what counsel could be reasonably expected to have told the detainee about. Such new procedures would not be aspects of the predictable police questioning, but would be matters for which the detainee’s participation is essential and for which the detainee would have a right to decline participation or at least a right to understand what is involved before participating. As to the latter, it might be noted parenthetically that there will be at least one type of investigation that police will not reveal to the detainee, namely the use of a ‘listening post’ in a cell block (either technological or human). Arguably that is also a variant on “interview”. The trial judge did not err in not finding a triggering change under Sinclair.