Legal Issues In Policing

• E96| Case law classic. Anonymous tip + corroboration ⇉ arrest ⇉ drug bust.

  Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message. In this episode, Mike discusses the case law classic R. v. Jir, 2010 BCCA 497 where a police officer, after acting on an anonymous tip, stopped a motorist and immediately arrested him. When police searched the trunk of his car without a warrant, 120,000 ecstasy tablets were discovered. Did the police have enough grounds to arrest the man based on the anonymous tip? Or was more needed? Mike looks at these questions and what factors you can use to assess the reliability of information provided by a tipster.Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]

  --------  

  25:27
• E95| Confidence polling in public institutions. How did the police stack up?

  Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message. In this episode, Mike again discusses recent survey results from Statistics Canada  about the amount of confidence Canadians had in various institutions, including the school system, media, parliament, the justice system and courts, and the police. Just how did the police compare to these other institutions? Check out the results for yourself.Confidence in institutions, by gender and other selected sociodemographic characteristicsConfidence in institutions, by gender and provinceThanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]

  --------  

  11:33
• E94| Shooting at, shot by & a search incident to arrest. Was 11 hour delay between arrest & search reasonable?

  Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message. In this episode, Mike discusses the Alberta Court of King’s Bench decision R. v. Desylva, 2025 ABKB 36 where a police officer was shot at by a man being pursued. When the man’s car got stuck in the snow, the officer unloaded 25 rounds at the man as his car spun out. The man fled on foot, only to be located laying in the snow suffering from serious gun shot wounds to his head and neck area. The man was transported to hospital and his clothing, which had been removed and bagged by hospital staff, was seized and searched some 11 hours after arrest. Items police found in the man’s clothing included a large sum of cash and 40 grams of cocaine. This evidence was crucial to drug charges and could explain the reasons or motive for the man’s evasion and flight from police. Did the time span of 11 hours between arrest and search render it outside the scope of the search incident to arrest doctrine? Or could the police offer a reasonable explanation for the delay? ASIRT Investigative ReportVideo of shootingThanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]

  --------  

  33:57
• E93| Lengthy drive to elicit confession. Starlight tour or legitimate police procedure?

  Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message. In this episode, Mike discusses the Manitoba Court of Appeal decision R. v. Pietz, 2025 MBCA 5 where police arrested a man in relation to the presumed death of another. After unsuccessfully trying to obtain a confession from the man, police took him for a lengthy drive in an effort to locate the victim’s body. During the ride, police kept the man in handcuffs, used offensive and profane language, and did not provide him with shoes, a jacket or a blanket while he was outside the police vehicle in chilly weather. Did the man’s removal from police headquarters in the middle of the night without his consent — along with the conditions of the ride — render the detention arbitrary under s. 9 of the Charter? And was an additional s. 10(b) advisement about the right to consult counsel required for this procedure? Listen now and learn a little — or a lot!Low court ruling Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]

  --------  

  27:49
• E92| A CSO search condition & reasonable suspicion. Why ask why?

  Provide your feedback here. Anonymously send me a text message. In this episode, Mike discusses R. v. Grassing, 2025 SKCA 1 where police where asked by a probation officer to do a curfew check and possibly search the residence of a man on a Conditional Sentence Order (CSO). The CSO had two search conditions, both requiring a reasonable suspicion the man was breaching a condition of his CSO before police could search. When the police searched the man’s apartment, they found methamphetamine and a firearm. A trial judge found the probation officer’s request was enough by itself to justify the search, the evidence was admitted at trial, and the man was convicted of drug and weapons offences. But how did the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal feel about the matter? Was the probation officer’s request enough or was more required? And if more was required, did the facts within police awareness meet the reasonable suspicion standard? Or did the search breach the man’s s. 8 Charter right to be secure against unreasonable search or seizure?Thanks for listening! Feedback welcome at [email protected]

  --------  

  21:00

More Education podcasts

Trending Education podcasts

About Legal Issues In Policing