Cameron Johnson, Barrister & Solicitor
#300 - 272 Victoria Street V2C 2A2 Kamloops, BC, Canada

Mr. Runkle (@Ian.Runkle.Lawyer) made an excellent video on R. v Zora and while I was intending to make one myself - I adopt this video instead.

Police imposed 6 conditions on a release after warrantless arrest on someone who turned themselves into police on an allegation of simple assault. No weapons were used in the alleged offense yet the police imposed a weapons prohibition. They imposed a reporting condition when they have stable housing and telecommunications access. Even the no-go and no-communication conditions aren't likely to be justified. NONE of those conditions are facially valid under R v. Zora (2020 SC...C 14), and the person should likely not even have been arrested. A summons should have issued or at the very least they should have been released on an appearance notice alone. Release conditions are predicated on the PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE. We fail at such a presumption and the police are especially bad at presuming innocence.

Congratulations to the newest lawyer in our office!

Bail is a uniquely individualized exercise of prosecutorial discretion and subject to oversight and approval of a judicial officer. It should not be a paint-by-numbers exercise. This week the SCC has reinforced their decision in Antic to UNANIMOUSLY exclaim - there is a 'principle of restraint' on incarceration awaiting trial and on the conditions imposed. "The setting of bail is an individualized process and there is no place for standard, routine, or boilerplate conditions, whether the bail is contested or is the product of consent. The principle of review means everyone involved in the crafting of conditions of bail should stop to consider whether the relevant condition meets all constitutional, legislative, and jurisprudential requirements." (at 100).

Things are changing quickly, are your affairs in order? A Solicitor (and Partner) with our firm explains the challenges of drafting and executing a will in these time and accommodations that can be made to accomplish the task.

The presumption of innocence is a fundamental notion and the foundation of our criminal justice system. A bail supervisor threatening to notify neighbors of conditions of release is clearly an onerous term and not one contemplated during the original release hearing. In this Application for Bail Review, Judicial Review, and Notice of Constitutional Question, I argued that the authority of the Crown (bail supervisor) to notify neighbors of an /accused/ (not convicted) persons... conditions was limited as the bail supervisor was supervising an accused person not someone who did not have the benefit of the presumption of innocence. Justice DLEY ruled on a bail review application and amended the conditions of release and admonished the Solicitor General's position. The actual Constitutional questions were not decided, but the judge is seized of the Application should the Crown seek to push the supposed right to do such notifications under s. 33.2(a) Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act, they claim to have. Defence counsel in BC must be aware that the Solicitor General claims the right to notify neighbors of the conditions of release of accused persons - and have a policy covering such at 4.2 of the Community Corrections Policy Manual. If such happens, I'm interested in assisting any counsel in fighting such notification as I regard it to be a flagrant violation of the presumption of innocence and I suggest that if FOIPPA applies, it's inoperable to the extent that it conflicts with the release provisions of the Criminal Code. Please contact me if you know of such occurring for individuals not subject to a probation order. --- The decision of Mr. Justice DLEY at 2020 BCSC 351 https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/20/03/2020BCSC0351.htm