The accused voluntarily went to a police station and asked that officers be sent to a ranch where he lived, but refused to answer questions about why they were needed.
Police discovered three murder victims at the ranch.
At trial, the judge instructed the jury that the accused's silence was post-offence conduct from which an inference of guilt could be drawn.
The accused was convicted, but the Court of Appeal ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court of Canada dismissed the Crown's appeal, holding that the right to silence exists even before detention or arrest, and that silence cannot be used as post-offence conduct to infer guilt.
