A. Goodman

During a trial for importing drugs, a voir dire was held to determine the admissibility of statements made by the accused to Canada Border Services Agency officers at the airport.

The court found that the Crown failed to prove the voluntariness of the statements made by both accused due to incomplete and unreliable officer notes that lacked context.

Furthermore, the court found that the officers breached one of the accused's s. 10(b) Charter rights by unreasonably delaying her opportunity to contact counsel.

The statements were excluded under s. 24(2) of the Charter.

Following his acquittal on weapons charges arising from the G20 protests, the applicant sought costs of $10,310 against the Crown under s. 24(1) of the Charter, alleging police and prosecutorial misconduct.

The court found no evidence of Crown misconduct or abuse of process in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.

Regarding police misconduct, the court held that the applicant had already received a remedy through the exclusion of evidence at trial, and that a civil claim for damages was the appropriate avenue for further relief.

The application for costs was dismissed.