Is a trier of fact entitled to the most favourable interpretation to the accused?
Alberta, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. B.A.R., 2009 ABPC 322 (CanLII):
I consider Nadeau v. R. (1984), 1984 CanLII 28 (SCC), 15 C.C.C. (3d) 499 (S.C.C.) as authority for the proposition that if a fact has not been established against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused is entitled to the most favourable interpretation to him. The accused benefits from any reasonable doubt at the outset. The trier of fact should not choose between two conflicting versions.
"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.alexi.com.
Other Questions
If a pension surplus exists and is accessible, entitlement is entitlement? (Alberta, Canada)
How has section 1 of the Interpretation Act, 1889, been interpreted? (Alberta, Canada)
How have courts interpreted the interpretation of a fire insurance contract? (Alberta, Canada)
Is a party entitled to double costs where it recovers a judgment that is more favourable than the amount offered? (Alberta, Canada)
How have the provisions of section 92 of the Constitution Act, 1867 been interpreted and interpreted by the courts? (Alberta, Canada)
How have the courts interpreted the meaning of the word "contract" in the context of an enforceable contract? (Alberta, Canada)
What entitlement does the Court have to examine evidence that is not in the record? (Alberta, Canada)
Can defence counsel argue that the accused has a right to adduce his new evidence for the first time? (Alberta, Canada)
How have restrictive covenants been interpreted in the context of real estate law? (Alberta, Canada)
How has the court interpreted an offer to maintain a water system and provide water to a number of residents? (Alberta, Canada)
