R. v Burns case Breif

Case Facts The defendants Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Ahmad Rafay were incriminate to suck up committed aggravated first degree murder in Washington State. In a vindication to an undercover RCMP officer in British Columbia, sit down as a wad boss, it is clamed that Burns was a come down killer hired by Rafay to kill his parents so that Rafay could trigger up insurance coin for their closes. It is claimed that Burns beat the victims with a baseball bat mend Rafay watched (para.10). They threw their cloths aside and took a vat to process away the blood. The accused claim that the alleged confession was a lie to growth the confidence of who they thought was a menage Boss (para.11). They were to be extradited to the United States, where if convicted could face the death penalty. The defendants appealed the extradition to the Minster of Justice. Burns line of work and organisation ministers Findings The accused claimed to the curate that their particle 6(1) (right to remain and return to Canada) patronise rights would be violated if they were extradited, and that as a result the Minister should consider if the defendants could be act in Canada (para.16). The respondents similarly claimed constituent 7 (fundamental justice) and section 12 (cruel and unusual punishment) of the charter would be violated if extradited. The appellants differentiated their show window from R.

v. Kindler and Ng because they were Canadian citizens, while Kindler and Ng were not. They claimed that Canada does not use up the right to send its citizens away with the possibility of never return contrary to 6(1) of the charter (para.17). The respondents as well as claim that their age at the time of the alleged offences, 18, should be taken into consideration. The Minister spurned the claim of banishment, because the purpose of the proportionateness was... If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Ordercustompaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, wisit our page: write my paper