R. V. Turpin Case Study

The Significance of the R. v. Turpin Case to Canadian Law

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was implemented 1982 has been essential in providing justice for all Canadian citizens. Countless amounts of cases have been decided to create the Charter that is well known in today’s society. Sharon Turpin and Latif Siddiqui were accused of first degree murder and according to the law, the trial was supposed to be tried by a judge and jury. The accused demanded a trial by judge alone because they believed that they were entitled to such a right. The R. v. Turpin case was a significant case that was tough to decide upon because there were many violations of different statutes such as the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Criminal

A crucial issue that was relevant during the trial was that should the Supreme Court of Canada support the Criminal Code under section 429 and 430 or the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms under section 11 and 15. This brought up the question that what is the true role of the Charter. Prior to the decision, there was confusion on whether or not the accused outside of Ontario had the right to choose who to be tried by. The court believed that being tried by a jury is a benefit that the accused is entitled to and not a punishment. As seen in history, individuals have praised the jury for being a privilege and a civil liberty that common law has to offer. Civil juries have also been described as an instrument of justice. The court referred back to a quote from a well-known judge named William Blackstone during the Elizabethan era who described the jury as “the glory of English law” and “the most transcendent privilege which any subject can enjoy.” Secondly, the court referred to the Singer v. United States case which was also very similar to the R. v. Turpin. Singer was charged for 30 accounts of criminal mail fraud. The defendant claimed that he had absolute right to choose to be tried with judge alone if a trial was for his advantage. After an extensive exhaustion of many sources and legal precedents, the court found that nowhere in the history of common law does it state that defendants should have the right to choose the method of their trial in a murder trial. The final decision in the Singer v. United States case also stated that the defenders only right concerning the method of trial is to be tried by both a jury and judge. This gave The Supreme Court of Canada enough evidence to conclude their decision that appellants had no right to choose who to be tried by. After the decision, this case became a permanent legal precedent for any other