WARNING
THIS IS AN APPEAL UNDER THE
YOUTH CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT
AND IS SUBJECT TO:
(1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a young person, or any other information related to a young person, if it would identify the young person as a young person dealt with under this Act.
(1) Subject to this section, no person shall publish the name of a child or young person, or any other information related to a child or a young person, if it would identify the child or young person as having been a victim of, or as having appeared as a witness in connection with, an offence committed or alleged to have been committed by a young person.
(1) Every person who contravenes subsection 110(1) (identity of offender not to be published), 111(1) (identity of victim or witness not to be published), 118(1) (no access to records unless authorized) or 128(3) (disposal of R.C.M.P. records) or section 129 (no subsequent disclosure) of this Act, or subsection 38(1) (identity not to be published), (1.12) (no subsequent disclosure), (1.14) (no subsequent disclosure by school) or (1.15) (information to be kept separate), 45(2) (destruction of records) or 46(1) (prohibition against disclosure) of the Young Offenders Act, chapter Y-1 of the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985,
(a) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or
(b) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
COURT OF APPEAL FOR ONTARIO
CITATION: R. v. S.M., 2012 ONCA 255
DATE: 20120420
DOCKET: C50403
Weiler, Sharpe and Blair JJ.A.
BETWEEN
Her Majesty the Queen
Respondent
and
S.M.
Appellant
Philip Campbell and Jonathan Dawe, for the appellant
Robert Gattrell, for the respondent
Heard: February 1, 2012
On appeal from the conviction entered by Justice Robert L. Maranger of the Superior Court of Justice, sitting with a jury, on November 28, 2008.
Sharpe J.A.:
[1] Following a trial before a judge and jury, the appellant was convicted of the first degree murder of Michael Oatway. The appellant was 17 years old at the time of the alleged offence. He was tried as a youth, and sentenced as an adult to life imprisonment with ten years of parole ineligibility. He appeals his conviction and raises two grounds of appeal. The first ground of appeal is that the trial judge erred by refusing to put self-defence to the jury on the ground that there was no air of reality on the evidence to the defence. The second is that the trial judge erred by failing to correct or remedy certain statements made by Crown counsel in his closing address.
FACTS
[2] On September 21, 2006, the appellant spent the evening with a group of five friends at a park where they were drinking. After they left the park, the appellant and three of his friends boarded a bus around 11 p.m. The bus was an articulated model with separate front and back sections. The appellant and his friends went to the back of the bus, where Michael Oatway, a 23-year old man, who was unknown to the appellant, sat listening to an iPod in the rearmost corner seat on the driver’s side.
[3] The appellant, 17 years old, was 5’6” and weighed 141 pounds. He had a muscular and athletic build. Oatway, 23 years old, was also 5’6” but weighed only 123 pounds and suffered from a muscular condition that restricted the mobility of his arms.
[4] O.L., one of the members of the appellant’s group, asked for a cigarette. One witness testified that Oat