Alta Prov Ct finds 10(b) violation for failing to give detainee access to Google to search for a lawyer: http://canlii.ca/en/ab/abpc/doc/2013/2013abpc13/2013abpc13.html#par19 … Retweeted by Graham T. Clark Expand
On February 13th, 2013, the above was a tweeted by a past Criminal Lawyers Association President’s law group. Thanks Frank. The point is simple: if you are under detention at the police station, the police have to really actually help you get in touch with your lawyer of choice. That’s if you have a lawyer of choice (if you don’t, police are required to put you in touch with a free ‘duty counsel’ lawyer, at least in Ontario).
What makes this case noteworthy is that the Judge found that in order to actually help you get in touch with your lawyer the police have to give you access to an internet connection to look up the number. Apparently there was evidence called to establish that lawyers have by and large stopped advertising in sources such as Yellow Pages and that the internet has really replaced the paper. You already knew that. Now at least one judge has acknowledged it…which will make it that much easier to get another judge to find the same thing.
Judges like to know other Judges have already “found” something so they can “follow” it. That is how the common law has developed through the use of precedent over the centuries. This case is available online at http://canlii.ca/t/fvz84 .