40:
277:
283:
190:
George
Pappajohn put his house up for sale through a real-estate company. He met with a female real-estate agent from the company at a bar. They had lunch together, including drinks, over the course of approximately three hours, after which the two went to Pappajohn's house where they engaged in
211:
The majority opinion was written by
Justice McIntyre. He first discussed the question of when a defence should be put to a jury. He held that a defence should be used when there is "some evidence which would convey a sense of reality in the submission." On the facts, he found that there was no
194:
The agent claimed that she was raped. However, Pappajohn claims that short of a few coy objections she had consented. After the event the woman was seen running out of the house naked, wearing a bow-tie, with her hands bound, and was in great distress.
202:
should be put to the jury. Namely, whether
Pappajohn should be able to claim that he mistakenly believed that she had consented. The trial judge refused to allow the defence and Pappajohn was convicted.
229:
The federal government later amended the criminal offence to require that the jury should "consider the presence or absence of reasonable grounds for that belief." Sec 265(4).
212:
evidence, other than the statement of the accused, that if believed, would have allowed for the possibility of consent. Accordingly, the lower court ruling was upheld.
239:(generally indexed as Sansregret v. The Queen, 1 S.C.R. 570), where it excluded the defense of mistake of fact where the defendant is found to be "wilfully blind"
252:
326:
345:
215:
Justice
Dickson took a different approach to the defence of mistake of fact. He stated that the defence was derived from the
360:
350:
221:
requirement, which is a subjective standard, and consequently the mistaken belief did not need to be reasonable.
230:
319:
365:
240:
17:
312:
128:
355:
175:
45:
112:
264:
8:
300:
71:
39:
236:
132:
199:
179:
104:
296:
108:
339:
124:
116:
231:
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/C-46/page-6.html#anchorbo-ga:l_VIII-gb:s_264_1
292:
276:
97:
120:
241:
http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/1985/1985scr1-570/1985scr1-570.htm
217:
147:
McIntyre J., joined by
Martland, Pigeon, Beetz and Chouinard JJ.
198:
During the trial the issue arose of whether the defence of
235:
The
Supreme Court itself clarified the law in the case of
253:
List of
Supreme Court of Canada cases (Laskin Court)
337:
320:
327:
313:
65:George Pappajohn v Her Majesty The Queen
206:
14:
338:
270:
178:decision on the criminal defence of
24:
25:
377:
258:
281:
275:
38:
163:Dickson J., joined by Estey J.
13:
1:
346:Supreme Court of Canada cases
185:
299:. You can help Knowledge by
224:
174:, 2 S.C.R. 120 is a famous
27:Supreme Court of Canada case
7:
246:
10:
382:
361:Canadian criminal case law
269:
84:Pappajohn appeal dismissed
54:Hearing: October 22, 1979
351:1980 in Canadian case law
159:
151:
143:
138:
93:
88:
80:
70:
60:
53:
37:
32:
265:full text at CanLII.org
176:Supreme Court of Canada
46:Supreme Court of Canada
56:Judgment: May 20, 1980
113:Louis-Philippe Pigeon
207:Opinion of the Court
191:sexual intercourse.
291:This article about
366:Canadian law stubs
308:
307:
167:
166:
16:(Redirected from
373:
329:
322:
315:
287:
286:
285:
284:
279:
271:
237:R. v. Sansregret
133:Julien Chouinard
129:William McIntyre
102:Puisne Justices:
89:Court membership
42:
30:
29:
21:
381:
380:
376:
375:
374:
372:
371:
370:
336:
335:
334:
333:
282:
280:
274:
261:
249:
227:
209:
200:mistake of fact
188:
180:mistake of fact
105:Ronald Martland
100:
55:
49:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
379:
369:
368:
363:
358:
356:Rape in Canada
353:
348:
332:
331:
324:
317:
309:
306:
305:
288:
268:
267:
260:
259:External links
257:
256:
255:
248:
245:
226:
223:
208:
205:
187:
184:
165:
164:
161:
157:
156:
153:
149:
148:
145:
141:
140:
136:
135:
109:Roland Ritchie
95:Chief Justice:
91:
90:
86:
85:
82:
78:
77:
74:
68:
67:
62:
61:Full case name
58:
57:
51:
50:
43:
35:
34:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
378:
367:
364:
362:
359:
357:
354:
352:
349:
347:
344:
343:
341:
330:
325:
323:
318:
316:
311:
310:
304:
302:
298:
294:
289:
278:
273:
272:
266:
263:
262:
254:
251:
250:
244:
242:
238:
233:
232:
222:
220:
219:
213:
204:
201:
196:
192:
183:
181:
177:
173:
172:
171:Pappajohn v R
162:
158:
154:
150:
146:
142:
139:Reasons given
137:
134:
130:
126:
125:Willard Estey
122:
118:
117:Brian Dickson
114:
110:
106:
103:
99:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
73:
69:
66:
63:
59:
52:
48:
47:
41:
36:
33:Pappajohn v R
31:
19:
301:expanding it
293:Canadian law
290:
234:
228:
216:
214:
210:
197:
193:
189:
170:
169:
168:
101:
94:
76:2 S.C.R. 120
64:
44:
155:Martland J.
152:Concurrence
98:Bora Laskin
340:Categories
186:Background
121:Jean Beetz
225:Aftermath
72:Citations
18:Pappajohn
247:See also
218:mens rea
144:Majority
160:Dissent
81:Ruling
295:is a
297:stub
342::
243:.
182:.
131:,
127:,
123:,
119:,
115:,
111:,
107:,
328:e
321:t
314:v
303:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
.svg){kind=small}