R v Barrett 2016 NSSC 11
From Ad IDEM / CMLA
Accused to stand trial on two separate counts of second degree murder. First trial to take place 9 months before second trial. Accused seeks a publication ban on evidence at the first trial until conclusion of his second trial. Application denied.
The main issue before the court was whether a publication ban on the first trial should be granted until the conclusion of the second trail.
The CBC and Cape Breton Post argued that the accused had not satisfied the evidentiary burden to obtain the ban. The Crown took no position on the application.
After considering recent court decisions and applying the Dagenais-Mentuck test, Justice Gogan found that:
...there is no basis in the evidence provided to ground a finding that there is a real and substantial risk to the accused by virtue only of the fact that there are 2 trials presently scheduled in the same year, one of which has been the subject of media attention.
Gogan J. goes on to conclude:
...that the applicant has failed to satisfy the first part of the Dagenais-Mentuck test. Accordingly, it is not necessary to consider the second part of the test.