The same principles apply to statements made by a motorist upon being questioned by an officer on matters unrelated to the operation of the vehicle. Indeed, the admission of such statements in response to police inquiries would have a greater tendency to bring the administration of justice into disrepute because it would be conscripted evidence. Unless there is evidence that the driver made an informed decision, upon being advised of his Charter rights, there can be no suggestion that the driver consented to the questioning. This is because, as a result of the detention, it can reasonably be inferred that the driver felt compelled to respond to the officer's questions: See, Regina v. Mellenthin, supra at para. 17.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexsei.com.