R. v. Van Hatten

[2001] O.J. No. 3845



The appellant was chaged on October 17 1999 with care and control of a motor vehicle while his ability was impaired. He retained counsel who, whitin tendays and requently thereafter, requested such videos as may have been recorded both at the Barrie OPP station and at the Barrie Police Department where the Appellant was taken on the night of his arrest. In each communication, counsel emphasized that such tapes are routinely erased after a period of time. The trial judge foundthat the defence was diligent in pursuing disclosre in a timely manner but accetped the Crowns explanation, found that the Crown acted in good raith and that the tapes were not lost as a result of negligence.



No evidence was called by the applicant in this case to demonstrate what the vido might have shown. Nor was it established that a video had ever existed since the equipment can be used to monitor only without recording. There is no evidence that a silent videp recording around the police station, used to monitor health and seculity, could have been relecant regarding speech or eyes.