Thank you for recounting these cases. I still can't get over that the Crown is even allowed to appeal a not-guilty verdict in a criminal trial. From the individual's standpoint, how is that not double jeopardy?
Unfortunately while the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes provisions such as section 11(h) prohibiting double jeopardy. However, the prohibition only applies after an accused person has been "finally" convicted or acquitted. Canadian law allows the prosecution to appeal an acquittal based on legal errors. In other words the Crown's appeal the shit out of cases until they get to he Supreme Court. It would appear that the good ole USA is the only country that has true double jeopardy -- meaning a person when found not guilty in a trial cannot be tried again for the same crime. District Attorneys, however, can find away around that by charging someone with a different, perhaps lesser charge.
Tamara Lich is a national hero.
Thank you for recounting these cases. I still can't get over that the Crown is even allowed to appeal a not-guilty verdict in a criminal trial. From the individual's standpoint, how is that not double jeopardy?
Unfortunately while the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms includes provisions such as section 11(h) prohibiting double jeopardy. However, the prohibition only applies after an accused person has been "finally" convicted or acquitted. Canadian law allows the prosecution to appeal an acquittal based on legal errors. In other words the Crown's appeal the shit out of cases until they get to he Supreme Court. It would appear that the good ole USA is the only country that has true double jeopardy -- meaning a person when found not guilty in a trial cannot be tried again for the same crime. District Attorneys, however, can find away around that by charging someone with a different, perhaps lesser charge.
This lawfare committed with the hard earned money of Canadian taxpayers is despicable. Congrats on another eye-opener of an article, Roxanne!