A Descriptive Analysis of How Canadian Police Officers Administer the Right-to-Silence and Right-to-Legal-Counsel Cautions

By Snook, Brent; Eastwood, Joseph et al. | Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, October 2010 | Go to article overview

A Descriptive Analysis of How Canadian Police Officers Administer the Right-to-Silence and Right-to-Legal-Counsel Cautions


Snook, Brent, Eastwood, Joseph, MacDonald, Sarah, Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice


Introduction

Suspects and accused persons facing a police interview are generally made aware of their legal rights through standardized pieces of text called police cautions. It is imperative that interviewees understand the legal rights contained in those cautions so that their rights are protected and the police are able to ensure the admissibility of statements (Marin 2004; Whittemore and Ogloff 1994). Unfortunately, experimental studies in various countries, such as Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom, have demonstrated that it is rare for people to understand fully the rights contained in police cautions (e.g., Cooke and Philip 1998; Eastwood and Snook 2009; Fenner, Gudjonsson, and Clare 2002; Grisso 1981). Such studies have typically presented the cautions in an ideal manner under highly controlled conditions. How well those past studies reflect reality is unknown, however, because there is a dearth of research on how police officers administer police cautions in actual interviews. By analysing a sample of police interviews, it may be possible to better understand and potentially improve this particular aspect of justice administration.

Canadian police cautions entail two basic rights: the right to silence and the right to legal counsel. The right to silence is derived from section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982), which states that "[e]veryone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice." Case law dictates that interviewees must be given a free choice about whether or not to speak to the police and that the police cannot interfere with this right (e.g., offer promises or threats in exchange for a confession) (see R v. Hebert). The right-to-silence caution is typically delivered when the interviewer has reasonable and probable grounds to believe that the interviewee has committed an offence (Marin 2004).

The right to legal counsel is contained in section 10(b) of the Charter and states that "[e]veryone has the right on arrest or detention to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right." As clarified in subsequent cases (i.e., R v. Brydges; R v. Bartle), the right to legal counsel includes the following four basic rights: (1) to retain and instruct counsel (i.e., a lawyer) without delay; (2) to access immediate, temporary, legal advice irrespective of financial status (duty counsel); (3) to obtain basic information about how to access available services that provide free, preliminary legal advice (e.g., phone number); and (4) to access legal counsel free of charge where an accused meets prescribed financial criteria set up by provincial legal aid plans.

Although police organizations presumably deliver cautions to detainees that outline both the right to silence and the right to legal counsel, case law states that they are only obligated to inform detainees of their right to legal counsel (see R. v. Papadopoulos). As discussed in R v. Hebert, one of the primary purposes of informing individuals of their right to legal counsel is to provide them with the ability to get legal advice regarding their rights, with the right to silence being chief among them. It is important that accused persons and suspects understand the right-to-legal-counsel caution because individuals can only waive or invoke their right to legal counsel if they have knowledge of those rights and can appreciate the consequences of giving up those rights (Korponay v. Attorney General of Canada; Clarkson v. The Queen). If the cautions are misunderstood from the outset, there are two consequences: (1) the protections that the cautions are supposed to afford are missing, and (2) subsequent statements from suspects may be ruled inadmissible.

Research has shown that the comprehension of Canadian police cautions is relatively low. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

A Descriptive Analysis of How Canadian Police Officers Administer the Right-to-Silence and Right-to-Legal-Counsel Cautions
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.