Quote:
|
Originally Posted by AVoiceOfReason
As a criminal defense attorney that has handled a few cases of this nature, I'm not sure what you base the notion that the cases in which someone is wiretapped results in the evidence being thrown out "a large percentage of the time." If you have any studies or stats to support this, I'd like to see it. My research and experience is contra to this--wiretaps are generally admissible when done pursuant to a court order allowing such.
|
I should personally know better than to throw out a generalization like that without a source, shame on me. I don't have the source, I left some of my old criminal law text back in my hometown when I moved back from winter vacation, otherwise I would seek it out for you.
It was highlighting several cases of improper procedure in RCMP, also mentioning how they rarely make it into the media. And also how the charter of rights and freedoms gives very stringent methods of evidence collection with regards to wiretaps, and how the RCMP had a buffer period of essentially testing how far they could push the envelope. As is the case where the judiciary decided that it was contrary to the charter to have sit-in wiretaps in holding cells, trying to elict information etc.
Obviously this isn't the case with gretzky, but I'm trying to give reasons as to why the results could be skewed contrary to what your observations during your job have been.
best I can do without the statistics, sorry
