« Exemple d'instructions au jury » : différence entre les versions

De Le carnet de droit pénal
Page créée avec « fr:Exemple d'instructions au jury {{HeaderJuryInstructions}} ==Introduction== {{seealso|Established Areas of Jury Instruction}} The following contains quotations of instructions that were endorsed or considered by appellate courts as being sufficient under certain circumstances. There are also outlines that enumerate types of instructions. There are four types of instructions: 1) selection instructions 2) introductory/preliminary 3) mid-trial instructions a... »
 
Aucun résumé des modifications
Ligne 1 : Ligne 1 :
[[fr:Exemple d'instructions au jury]]
[[en:Example Jury Instructions]]
{{HeaderJuryInstructions}}
{{HeaderJuryInstructions}}



Version du 7 septembre 2024 à 15:13

Introduction

Voir également: Established Areas of Jury Instruction

The following contains quotations of instructions that were endorsed or considered by appellate courts as being sufficient under certain circumstances. There are also outlines that enumerate types of instructions.

There are four types of instructions: 1) selection instructions 2) introductory/preliminary 3) mid-trial instructions and 4) final

Example Types

Evidence

Admissions

Voir également: Admissions
  • "An admission stands in the place of and renders unnecessary testimony or exhibits to prove what has been admitted. Jurors are to take what is admitted as proven fact and consider the facts admitted, along with the rest of the evidence in deciding the case."[1]
  1. R c Brookfield Gardens Inc, 2018 PECA 2 (CanLII), par Murphy JA, au para 25

Circumstantial Evidence

Expert Evidence

Selection

Challenge for Cause

Voir également: Challenge for Cause

Race

  • "Thinking about your own beliefs, would your ability to judge the evidence in this case without bias, prejudice or partiality, be affected by the fact that [accused] is black?"[1]

Unsavoury (Vetrovec) Witnesses

Voir également: Disreputable and Unsavoury Witnesses

Offences

Murder

  • On the issue of intent, the Judge must instruct the jury to "consider all of the evidence" when deciding the issue of intent.[1]
  • Inferences on intent "inference that may be rebutted by evidence of intoxication."[2]
  1. R c Pruden (DJ), 2012 MBCA 62 (CanLII), 280 Man R (2d) 207, par Steele JA, au para 4
  2. , ibid., au para 6

Defences


See Also