In a pre-trial motion, the Crown sought to admit two statements made by the accused to police, while the defence alleged Charter breaches under ss. 8, 9, and 10 regarding the statements and the warrantless seizure of the accused's computer.
The court found both statements were voluntary and the product of an operating mind, rejecting the accused's claims of confusion due to illness and medication.
The court also dismissed the Charter applications, finding no change in jeopardy requiring a restatement of rights, and concluding that the warrantless entry and seizure of the computer were justified by exigent circumstances to prevent the destruction of evidence.
