|
''R v Lifchus'', () 3 S.C.R. 320 is a leading Supreme Court of Canada decision on the legal basis of the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard for criminal law. Cory J. outlined several core principles the reasonable doubt standard and provided a list of points that must be explained to a jury when they are to consider the standard. ==Background== William Lifchus was a stockbroker who misrepresented the value of a bond in his personal margin account to his employer, defrauding them of a substantial amount of money. He was charged with fraud and theft of over $1000. Lifchus was convicted of fraud before a jury. He appealed on the ground that the jury was misinstructed about the standard of "proof beyond a reasonable doubt". There were four issues before the Court: 1) Must a trial judge provide the jury with an explanation of the expression “reasonable doubt”? 2) If so, how should this concept be explained to the jury? 3) Did the charge in this case amount to a misdirection on the meaning of “reasonable doubt”? 4) If the charge in this case was insufficient, ought this Court give effect to the curative proviso set out at s. 686(1)(b)(iii) of the Criminal Code? 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「R v Lifchus」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|