2. Forms of Defence Established in Case Law automatism automatism mistake of fact mistake of fact mistake of law mistake of law

3. Automatism: (AKA Non-insane automatism) A defence based on a claim that one's actions were made while their mind was dissociated from their body. Requires Reverse Burden of Proof, as the defendant has the evidential responsibility to prove automatism. Acid Test: Did one’s body commit the offence independent of their mind. Examples:sleepwalkingpneumoniastrokehypoglycaemia psychological shock / trauma concussion reflex actions

4. Delay in Lees decision Last Updated Fri, 28 May 1999 16:59:39 EDT CBC NewsCBC News VANCOUVER - A ruling by Canada's Supreme Court has caused a delay in the case against Victoria realtor Patrick Lees. A judge was to rule on the second-degree murder case today but she now says that a ruling by Canada's top court this week means she wants to re-consider her decision. Patrick Lees had pleaded not guilty to the murder of his wife Laurie. She was found strangled in her Saanich home in January 1998. One of the key arguments in Lees defense was that he was in a state of automatism when attacking his wife. He said his wife had threatened to accuse him of molesting their daughter if he did not give her what she wanted in a divorce. Lees's lawyer argued that his clients body and mind were somehow disconnected at the time of the attack and the slaying was involuntary. The circumstances are similar to the case of Bert Stone. He's a B.C. man who also used the automatism defense in the stabbing death of his wife. His lawyer had argued Stone entered the disassociated state after his wife had berated him. Earlier this week the Supreme Court of Canada upheld Stone's seven-year sentence. The court said there needed to be more evidence of the disassociated state before it could be considered a defense. Now the B.C. Supreme Court will hear more arguments on the Lees case in light of the Stone ruling. The case will be back in court next Tuesday. CopyrightCopyright ©2005 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - All Rights Reserved

5. Patrick Lees found guilty Last Updated Tue, 01 Jun 1999 20:52:56 EDT CBC NewsCBC News VANCOUVER - There were tears of joy in a Victoria courtroom today as Patrick Lees was found guilty of murdering his wife, Laurie. The well known realtor from Saanich was sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 10 years. In finding Lees guilty of second degree murder, Madam Justice Geena Keeano referred to last week's ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada on the so-called "automatism defense." Lees had argued he was provoked into killing his wife after she threatened to accuse him of molesting their four-year-old daughter. Lees said he couldn't remember strangling her with his belt. He testified his mind didn't know what his body was doing. The judge said Lees failed to meet the new rigid guidelines for the automatism defense, established by the high court. Laurie's mother, Barb, says a huge burden has been lifted from her family. With the trial over, Laurie Lee's family will begin to focus on raising her two children, a five year old girl and a three year old boy, who've already been told their mother was murdered and now, that their father will spend at least the next ten years in jail for killing her. CopyrightCopyright ©2005 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation - All Rights Reserved

6. Mistake of Fact: A defence based on a claim that one committed the offence because they mistook a critical fact. Acid Test: Would the person have not committed the offence if they had known the true fact. Example: Serving alcohol to a minor who provided fake ID Mistake of age Mistake of age 150 (4) It is not a defence to a charge under section 151 or 152, subsection 160(3) or 173(2), or section 271, 272 or 273 that the accused believed that the complainant was fourteen years of age or more at the time the offence is alleged to have been committed unless the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain the age of the complainant.

7. Mistake of Law: A defence based on a claim that one committed the offence because they did not know that their action was against the law. This is an exception to Section 19 of the Criminal Code (Ignorance of the law is not an excuse). Colour of Right: An honestly held belief in entitlement to property. (Generally a defence to a charge of theft.) Example: Entering a family property without knowing that it had been sold to another family. Officially Induced: The accused was lead to believe that the act was not an offence by a representative of the state. Example: Ministry of Transport informed one that they could drive with an expired license.