R. v Burns case Breif

Case Facts The defendants Glen Sebastian Burns and Atif Ahmad Rafay were accused to have committed alter foremost degree murder in Washington State. In a confession to an undercover RCMP officer in British Columbia, sitting as a mob boss, it is clamed that Burns was a subjugate killer hired by Rafay to kill his parents so that Rafay could trip up insurance money for their deaths. It is claimed that Burns swot the victims with a baseball bat while Rafay watched (para.10). They threw their cloths away and took a bath to process away the blood. The accused claim that the alleged(a) confession was a lie to gain the confidence of who they ideal was a men grow Boss (para.11). They were to be extradited to the United States, where if convicted could typeface the death penalty. The defendants appealed the extradition to the Minster of Justice. Burns line of work and government ministers Findings The accused claimed to the attend that their fraction 6(1) (right to remain and return to Canada) hold rights would be violated if they were extradited, and that as a result the minister of religion should consider if the defendants could be tried in Canada (para.16). The respondents similarly claimed naval division 7 (fundamental justice) and section 12 (cruel and unusual punishment) of the charter would be violated if extradited. The appellants severalise their case from R. v. Kindler and Ng because they were Canadian citizens, while Kindler and Ng were non. They claimed that Canada does not have the right to send its citizens away with the possibility of never returning contrary to 6(1) of the charter (para.17). The respondents also claim that their age at the time of the alleged offences, 18, should be taken into consideration. The Minister rejected the claim of banishment, because the purpose of the agreement was... If you want to uprise a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If y! ou want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper