INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section allows a judge to order more information about private communications intended to be used as evidence.
SECTION WORDING
190 Where an accused has been given notice pursuant to subsection 189(5), any judge of the court in which the trial of the accused is being or is to be held may at any time order that further particulars be given of the private communication that is intended to be adduced in evidence.
EXPLANATION
Section 190 of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the provision of notice in relation to private communication intended to be used as evidence in a trial. According to subsection 189(5), a party intending to rely on such evidence must provide notice to the accused. If this notice has been provided, Section 190 allows a judge to order that further particulars be provided with regard to the private communication in question. The purpose of this provision is to ensure that the accused has sufficient information with which to prepare their defence and make informed decisions about their case. By providing more details about the private communication, the accused may be better equipped to challenge its admissibility or relevance, and to formulate their arguments accordingly. It is worth noting that the use of private communication as evidence is subject to strict rules under Canadian law. In order for such evidence to be admissible in court, it must have been obtained legally, and its probative value (i.e. its usefulness in establishing or disproving a fact in issue) must outweigh its prejudicial effect (i.e. the risk that it will unfairly influence the court or jury). Section 190 helps to ensure that these rules are respected, by allowing judges to intervene if they believe that more information is necessary for the proper administration of justice.
COMMENTARY
Section 190 of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that regulates the use of private communication as evidence in a criminal trial. This section provides the accused with a right to request further particulars of the private communication that the prosecutor intends to adduce in evidence. The purpose of this provision is to give the accused notice of the private communication that will be used against them in court. This notice allows the accused to prepare a defense against the evidence and to challenge its admissibility. The requirement for notice of private communication as evidence is a fundamental aspect of the Canadian justice system. It ensures that the accused is informed of all the evidence against them and allows them to prepare their defense accordingly. This requirement also ensures that the evidence presented in court is reliable and trustworthy. It is important to note that under Section 190, any judge of the court in which the trial is being held or is set to be held may order that further particulars be given of the private communication. This gives the judge considerable discretion in determining the scope and nature of the additional information that is required to be provided to the accused. The discretion of the judge in this matter is important, as it allows for the case to be heard and judged on its specific circumstances. The judge can determine what is necessary for the accused to prepare their defense. They can also consider factors such as the type and nature of the private communication, the potential prejudice that may arise from its use, and the possible effect on the fairness of the trial. In conclusion, Section 190 of the Criminal Code of Canada is an important provision that protects the rights of the accused by providing them with notice of the private communication that will be used against them in court. This notice requirement ensures that the accused has a fair opportunity to defend themselves and challenges the admissibility of evidence. The provision also gives the judge discretion to determine what additional particulars should be provided, ensuring that justice is served in a manner that is tailored to the specific needs and circumstances of the case.
STRATEGY
Section 190 of the Canadian Criminal Code relates to the provision of further particulars in regard to private communication intended to be adduced as evidence in a court of law. This section is crucial for both the accused and the prosecutor, as it can impact the outcome of the trial. Therefore, it is important to consider strategic options that could help to maximize the benefits of this section. One of the main strategic considerations when dealing with section 190 is the timing of the request for further particulars. The accused and the prosecutor should make the request for further particulars in a timely manner. This is because the court must ensure that the accused has a fair and full opportunity to answer the allegations made against them. Therefore, it may be helpful to request further particulars early in the trial process, as this can ensure that the accused has the necessary information to mount a meaningful defense. Another strategic consideration is the content of the request for further particulars. The accused and the prosecutor must ensure that their request for further particulars is specific and covers all aspects of the private communication. This is because the court will not order further particulars that are vague or general in nature. For instance, if an accused requests further particulars about a specific text message, they should provide details about who sent the message, the content of the message, and the context in which it was sent. In some cases, it may be helpful to argue that the private communication is inadmissible in court. This argument could be made on the grounds that the communication is privileged or that it was obtained illegally. For instance, if the communication was obtained through wiretapping or surveillance, the accused could argue that it was obtained in violation of their privacy rights. Alternatively, if the communication was made in confidence, such as a conversation between a lawyer and their client, the accused could argue that it is protected by solicitor-client privilege. Another strategic option is to challenge the authenticity or accuracy of the private communication. This could be done by calling into question the manner in which the evidence was obtained. For instance, if a recording was made in a noisy environment, the accused could argue that it is not clear or accurate enough to be considered as evidence. Similarly, if the communication was transcribed by a human, errors or omissions could be highlighted to challenge the accuracy of the evidence. In conclusion, section 190 of the Canadian Criminal Code is an important provision for both the accused and the prosecutor. Understanding the strategic considerations when dealing with this section can help to ensure that the accused has a fair trial and that the prosecutor can establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Some strategies that could be employed include timely requesting for further particulars, making specific requests, arguing inadmissibility, or challenging the authenticity or accuracy of the evidence.