Its unquestionable that meeting
the criminal code standard is more difficult than the section 13 standard but I think it remains to be seen that Criminal Code will be ineffective.
I find the argument that
the criminal code standard of «willful promotion of hatred» is too difficult to prove to be unpersuasive.
Not exact matches
Despite a
Criminal Code that endorses pre-trial detention only where absolutely necessary for public safety, decades of «bail creep» have made it more or less
standard for police officers and crown attorneys to insist on «show cause» hearings in all but the most trifling of cases.
The Canadian Bar Association supported «retaining section 13 as a useful tool,» but had reservations about the punitive fines and stated in a paper that promotion of hatred is a «social evil» that has increased with the proliferation of the Internet, and that the
standard for wilful promotion of hatred in the
Criminal Code is very hard to prove.
«Also, as a Canadian, we have one
Criminal Code and it doesn't make sense to subject people to different
standards just because they come from different parts of the country,» he adds.
... Canada's
criminal code says that judges may take pre-trial custody into account and that discretion has become a near -
standard practice, backed up by support from various appeal courts.
So far, only three published studies have analyzed the association between brief readability and case outcome, 50 and no studies have analyzed that association in the trial courts, where most lawyers practice.51 Long and Christensen sampled 882 appellate briefs from the Supreme Court, federal appellate courts, and state supreme courts.52 Their dependent variable was the outcome of the appeal (affirmed or reversed), while their independent variable was readability measured by the Flesch Reading Ease score as calculated by Microsoft Word.53 For federal appellate and state supreme court briefs, the researchers
coded control variables for federal or state court,
standard of review, presence of a dissenting opinion, and readability of the opinion deciding the appeal.54 For United States Supreme Court briefs, the researchers
coded control variables for constitutional issue,
criminal or civil case, presence of a dissenting opinion, and opinion readability.55 They found no statistically significant correlation between readability and outcome in the briefs in their study.56
Fortunately the
standard for conviction in very high: like every other charge in the
Criminal Code, an allegation of Sexual Assault must be proven Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
The
standard conditions of that sort of a punishment is staying at the prescribed place at the prescribed time (art 43b para 3.1 Executive
Criminal Code) within the limited distance.
In my last post, I considered the new defence of the person section in the
Criminal Code, ruminating on the increased reliance this new section appears to have on the «reasonableness» or «reasonable person»
standard of assessing the defence.