Le fait d'avoir posé un acte entravant la justice dans un autre but est un moyen de défense valable

R. v. Robinson, 2012 BCSC 430

Lien vers la décision

[22]           The mens rea requires specific intent so that an accused must in fact have intended to act in a way tending to obstruct justice (R. v. Hawkins, 2002 BCCA 3 at para. 5, 48 C.R. (5th) 21). It is a defence if the act was done for another purpose (R. v. Hearn (1989), 1989 CanLII 3938 (NL CA), 48 C.C.C. (3d) 376 (Nfld. C.A.) aff’d 1989 CanLII 14 (SCC), [1989] 2 S.C.R. 1180). It is not enough if Robinson’s actions were accidental or the result of mistake or a simple error in judgment (Watson at para. 17). Robinson must have known that what he was doing when he told Swallow that he took two shots of vodka post-accident would obstruct or interfere with the investigation of his impairment and that he intended that it would do so.