Does the fact that the accused was given a warning or obtained legal advice between the two statements?

At common law, the fact that the accused was given a warning or had obtained legal advice between the two statements was a factor to be considered but was by no means determinative. The fact that the accused received intervening legal advice would have little effect where the second statement was induced by the existence of the first statement: R. v. T.(E.) at p. 305. On this point, Mr. Justice Iacobucci cited an earlier decision of the court in Boudreau v. The King (1949), 1949 CanLII 26 (SCC), 94 C.C.C. 1, in which Estey J. stated as follows at p. 25: A warning under such circumstances, when already he had given information in reply to questions and when immediately after the warning he is further questioned by the same parties in a manner that directed his mind to the information already given, is quite different in its effect from a warning given before any questions are asked.