Angry in the Great White North

Here is the formal definition of obstruction of justice from the Canadian criminal code, Part IV, Offense Against the Administration of Law and Justice, Misleading Justice, Obstructing Justice:

139. (3) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), every one shall be deemed wilfully to attempt to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice who in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed,

(a) dissuades or attempts to dissuade a person by threats, bribes or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

(b) influences or attempts to influence by threats, bribes or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

(c) accepts or obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence, or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

A proposed judicial proceeding. Let's say I have evidence that a crime has been committed, say forged documents, and I make it known that I'm about to call the police. In other words, the act of calling the police implicity constitutes a proposal that a judicial proceeding be initiated. Then someone offers me money on the condition that I do not call the police. Potentially some guilty party will now avoid paying for his crimes (I say "potentially" because until the police complete the investigation, we can't be certain that a crime has indeed been committed). Is that obstruction of justice under the code?

What if the person who makes the offer is knowingly protecting a specific person who might be charged at the guilty party? Does that change things?

Interestingly, it is the attempt that is illegal, regardless of whether it succeeds at preventing the wheels of justice from turning.

One question is whether calling the cops counts as part of a judicial proceeding:

“judicial proceeding” means a proceeding

(a) in or under the authority of a court of justice,

(b) before the Senate or House of Commons or a committee of the Senate or House of Commons, or before a legislative council, legislative assembly or house of assembly or a committee thereof that is authorized by law to administer an oath,

(c) before a court, judge, justice, provincial court judge or coroner,

(d) before an arbitrator or umpire, or a person or body of persons authorized by law to make an inquiry and take evidence therein under oath, or

(e) before a tribunal by which a legal right or legal liability may be established,

whether or not the proceeding is invalid for want of jurisdiction or for any other reason;

Is a police investigation considered a judicial proceeding? Are police acting under the authority of a court of justice?

Or is there another part of the Criminal Code that says you can't offer money to people in return for not reporting a what might be a criminal act?

Or is it legal in Canada to make that part of a contract? Especially if one party has already indicated that they are considering calling the police because of strong suspicions held that a crime has been committed?

Interesting questions.

And then there is accessory after the fact:

23. (1) An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling that person to escape.

So providing any kind of assistance to help a specific person avoid being caught by the police is illegal. But for it to be a crime, it requires knowing someone is guilty of a crime, and not merely being suspicious, at least as I read this.

Check out other entries from the David Pretlove category
Results will open in a new window.

Check out what Canadian bloggers have posted about David Pretlove
Results will open in a new window.

Check out what has been written about Liberal Party scandals on the web
Results will open in a new window.

Check out other entries from the True Crime category
Results will open in a new window.