QUEEN’S BENCH FOR SASKATCHEWAN Citation: 2005 SKQB 257 Date: 20050602 Docket: Q.B. CRIM 1963 Judicial Centre: Yorkton BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN and MARGARET JEAN FITCH Counsel: Ronald J. Balacko for the Crown Kenneth S. Westlake for the Margaret Jean Fitch FIAT ON APPLICATION FOR DISCLOSURE MacDONALD J. June 2, 2005 [1] Thank you to both counsel for providing their arguments and extensive authorities. [2] The essence of the authorities is that on motions of this kind the Court ought to guard against the pursuit of what have been termed “fishing expeditions”—speculative quests for information without any real expectation about the outcome of the quest or its relevance to the case. [3] Here, however, the defence has already indicated that issues around s. 8 and s. 9 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (the “Charter”) will be raised at trial. [4] Defence now wants further disclosure of information for the purpose of preparing for and pursuing inquiry into the facts that relate to those important issues. [5] To pursue the fishing analogy so often used in the authorities, the purpose of such an inquiry will in part be to determine whether, in comparison with the guarantees given by the Charter, the investigation in this case “cast too wide net”. [6] Accordingly, the Crown shall make timely disclosure of: (a) The number of stops of out-of-province vehicles made by Constable Chornecki in each of the years 2002, 2003 and 2004; (b) The reason for each stop in the first place; (c) How many such stops resulted in search for contraband, including narcotics; (d) How many of those searches were done using the “consent” form used by Constable Chornecki; (e) How many of those searches were conducted using search warrant; (f) Specifics of any other grounds for those searches that were applied and how many times; (g) On how many occasions did the searches result in the finding of contraband, including narcotics; [7] The parties will note that have not ordered that the names of the drivers stopped be disclosed and that have not ordered the actual notes of the officer to be reproduced. The notes of course will presumably supply some details of the required disclosure as ordered above and as usual will need to be made available for the purposes of evidence at trial if required and shown to be relevant to the proceedings as they unfold. J. L. B. MacDonald
FIAT: The defence has indicated that issues around s. 8 and s. 9 of the Charter will be raised at trial. Defence now wants further disclosure of information that relate to those important issues. HELD: Further disclosure is ordered. The names of the drivers stopped will not be disclosed and the actual notes of the officer are not ordered to be produced.