Many famous courtroom trials have occurred through history. Because our society is so media-driven, we tend to think of famous or noteworthy trials in American terms, such as Charles Manson, O.J. Simpson and the Lindbergh kidnappers.
But there are many Canadian trials that are famous (and infamous). If it’s sex, drama, murder or important legal precedent you’re after, you need look no further than our own country. Here are some of the older, more obscure trials.
• With Grey Cup week upon us, I am reminded of the case of Canadian Admiral Corp. Ltd. vs. Rediffusion Inc., a 1954 decision. This case involved the broadcast of a football game. Canadian Admiral had bought the rights to broadcast the game live and did so through its three cameras set up in the stadium.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers agree to AgriStability changes
federal government proposed several months ago to increase the compensation rate from 80 to 90 per cent and double the maximum payment from $3 million to $6 million
Rediffusion picked up the transmission of the game and sold it for broadcast to private homes and public showings in bars and the like.
Canadian Admiral sued, claiming copyright infringement, but lost. A federal judge ruled there could be no copyright claimed in the broadcast of a live game, nor generally in a sporting event since the results were not known. The copyright law has evolved since then, but this decision was a boon to football fans (real football, not the NFL) throughout this great land.
• Abortion vs. pro-life proponents: Again many of us tend to look to the U.S. as leaders in this area (Roe vs. Wade) but that’s incorrect. Many of us have heard of Dr. Henry Morgentaler, who was a leading proponent of abortion. But the 1879 case of Dr. Emily Stowe is equally notable. She was one of Canada’s first female doctors and she had provided certain drugs to a woman who was pregnant. Some months later, the patient died. Dr. Stowe was prosecuted for having “administered and caused to be taken poisons with intent to procure a miscarriage”, which was made an offence in Canada in 1869. She faced a life sentence for this alleged crime.
Surprisingly, because most charges of this type in the 1800s led to convictions, she was found not guilty. The coroner had misplaced all the medical evidence and exhibits. It was determined that numerous members of the medical establishment were unsympathetic to Dr. Stowe merely because she was a woman and that one had even publicly referred to her as a “bitch” (it was the 1800s). Ultimately, the evidence was so weak that the judge did not even allow the case to go to a jury and she was acquitted.
• This is the 125th year since the Riel Rebellion. A tense and dramatic trial, with the accused Riel making an impassioned address to the six-man jury, it has been recounted and made into plays for years. The transcript of the evidence is still available and has provoked discussions as to whether Riel was a patriot or a madman. Assuming the transcript is accurate, it is difficult to make sense out of some of what he says. This trial, and the events surrounding it, were (and are) as important to the formation of Canada as many court cases in Britain and the United States.
Rick Danyliuk is a lawyer with McDougall Gauley LLP in Saskatoon.
