The case is of keen importance to lawyers and judges, not so much because of the facts or the charge, but because the Supreme Court may take the opportunity to decide generally if the test for criminal liability should be based on what the person was thinking, believing and feeling, rather than on an idea of what reasonable behaviour should be, said Eugene Meehan, an Ottawa lawyer with Supreme Advocacy LLP and a former executive legal officer with the Supreme Court of Canada.
—
Supreme Court to consider whether mother abandoned baby intentionally
The trial judge found, based on expert evidence, that A.D.H. didn’t realize she was pregnant, the baby was born at least a month premature, and the birth was precipitous — which the physician defined as birth with less than one hour’s labour. According to court documents, A.D.H. spent a total of 14 minutes in the Walmart.
[sarcasm]well, now that expert witnesses were involved I’m sure it must be right[/sarcasm]. is there an expert witness to ever offer evidence against the party that brings / pays them?!?
Posted October 10, 2012 at 2:04pm in scc criminal liability expert witness ipse dixit litigation law canada supreme court
||
home
