Recent content by Solo712

That is most certainly not the case. The jury may find the defendant not guilty not because it accepts the defense but because the state has not proven each element of the charge against him. And the elements are different for M2 and manslaughter.

Have you seen anything in MSM after the first statement which confirmed that TB's identity was identified by a DNA test performed on the charred body ? Please pass it on to me if you have. I have not seen anything. DNA testing on charred remains or ashes is a complicated matter and does...

Normally, IMO, 'unrecognizable' would mean, 'not possible to confirm visually the identity of'. However, LE used an interesting qualifier ' totality of evidence' when they made the determination that the remains were TB's. This to me indicates that no DNA or dental positive ID was extracted...

<modsnip> The fact that someone may be arrested without warrant by a traffic police officer does not make the legal issue criminal. I commented originally to state that the possession of a vehicle with a tampered-with or obliterated VIN is not a criminal offence in Canada. I stand by what I...

We were discussing Criminal Code, not Traffic Safety Act. So, you will have to show us where possession of a VIN is a criminal offence in Canada. J.

There is no offence stemming from the possession of a defaced VIN. There is an offence in possession of property obtained by crime. In establishing whether a part or a vehicle has been obtained by illegal means a defaced VIN makes it the responsibility of the person in the possession of the item...

Thanks, toom. Its basically that: if the VIN was tampered with, you, the owner will need to establish the legitimate provenance of the property (and not the contrary by the prosecutor). "Knowing" does not enter into discussion: it is assumed that the one in whose possession the vehicle is...

Bessie, with respect: ad 1) This falls under what I would call 'common knowledge'. We in Canada have one set of criminal statutes; everyone who comments publicly on matters under scrutiny here, let alone someone who moderates the discussion, should know that. Section 91(27) of the Constitution...

Three factual points: 1) Ontario, like any other Canadian province or territory, is under the jurisdiction of the The Criminal Code (of Canada) (CC). 2) There is no offence relating to "possession of defaced VIN" in CC. The offenses stemming from possession would be tried under sections...

It was in the Star. Best, J.

For me, the announcement by Kavanagh that there may not be a third suspect further calls into question his judgment. He assured everyone on May 21. there was no danger to the public and now, two weeks later, he is telling us that the investigation has not yet established the setting and the...

No, you are wrong about this also. I simply stated that the reports about Kavanagh state that his background was homicide. This in response to your and CanuckSleuth's assertions that he had expertize in organized auto theft. It is not as much a point of contention as it is a point of fact...

Well, I have found something that puts this conjecture to rest (hopefully): Surely, if Kavanagh wasn't sure himself what to make of the vehicles in the hangar he would not have been part of the BEAR unit. I am sticking with the reports that say the Sgt-Det's background is homicide. Best...

Not sure about this: if Ontario follows Civil forfeiture of other provinces, the 'preservation' order or orders is (are) are directed at the court-appointed administrator of the property. This step is usually taken to protect the original holder or holders in case the property is later ordered...

Would you be so good and send the link to the source of this info ? Much obliged. J.