[Ed.: this title was only "Evidence Withheld?" until I turned discussion more to the Ottawa Citizen Arar warrants.]
I sure would have wanted to have these tapes if I was representing people in the same group charged with assaulting the police making these recordings. You will recall what the Supreme Court of Canada thinks of evidence not getting into the hands of the defence to ensure a fair trial.
Not a good week for Canadian police communications officers getting good nights sleeps.
Comments
Alan - January 22, 2004 12:20 PM
Following on the link above referencing the <i>Ottawa Citizen</i> search of a journalists home case, here is the statute under which the search was conducted and a Department of Justice backgrounder on the range of statutes put in place in Canada after 9/11.
Alan - January 22, 2004 1:00 PM
The very Brent himself - newsman as well as ubiquitron and quality music recipient and purveyor - guided me via email to this <i>National Post</i> article on the ruling yesterday on the limits of warrants and journalists:<blockquote class="smalltext">hello alan,<p>this was discuseed uin greated detail this morning on Ott Morn. it was a warrant sderved to andrew macintosh at the nat post during the shawinigate affair.<p>here's a link to their story on that decision.<p>http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=e7dcfef2-cc5d-4e84-8b54-076901f81829<p>b.</blockquote>What do not know is whether the <i>Security of Information Act</i> applies to the National Post case and so whether it colours what the police have done in Ottawa in pursuit of the leak in the Arar case. Will keep checking.