What are the reasons of the trial judge's refusal to accept the Respondent's evidence that he requested a last chance?
Ontario, Canada
The following excerpt is from R. v. Mtgona, 2021 ONSC 1482 (CanLII):
I agree with the Respondent that the reasons of the trial judge make clear that on the evidence before him, he was not able to reject the Respondent’s evidence that he requested a last chance and was not provided one. I also note that the trial judge explicitly noted that while he could not accept the Respondent’s evidence, on application of R v. W.D. 1991 CanLII 93 (SCC), [1991] 1 S.C.R.742 the evidence surrounding the request for an additional chance left him in a reasonable doubt that the Respondent was intentionally frustrating the testing process by feigning.
"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
Is a trial judge required to review all the evidence at trial? (Ontario, Canada)
After a jury has delivered its verdict, can a trial judge refuse to accept the verdict? (Ontario, Canada)
What are the main reasons the Divisional Court of Justice has found that the Applicant and Respondent did not have a reasonable chance of success in their appeal? (Ontario, Canada)
Does a trial judge have to detail every aspect of her decision if she prefers some evidence over other evidence? (Ontario, Canada)
Is Rule 2.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to Respondent Respondents to Respondents Respondents? (Ontario, Canada)
How has the trial judge considered the totality of evidence at trial for impaired driving? (Ontario, Canada)
Is there any evidence of judicial bias in the trial judge's reasons relied on by ING? (Ontario, Canada)
How has the trial judge reviewed the evidence at a jury trial? (Ontario, Canada)
When will the judge refuse to allow the evidence to be presented to the jury? (Ontario, Canada)
Is a judge required to be "comprehensive" on all aspects of the evidence at trial? (Ontario, Canada)
