2.  Theren’s Case  Charter of Rights and Freedoms gave Canadian citizens a greater role in law reform  Courts could only declare a law invalid if it exceeded the scope of their authority  Charter meant the court could strike down any law which infringed on rights listed in CCRF

3.  Idea of being informed of right to a lawyer is a misconception prior to 1982.  Only American’s had to be informed of a right to a lawyer  Media  Miranda only applied in U.S.  Charter of Rights and Freedoms guaranteed this right for Canadians

4.  Case of Paul M. Therens  Night of drinking  Learned friends killed while canoeing  Drove his car home and smashed into tree  Police demanded Therens provide breath sample  Did not inform him of right to a lawyer  Went to police station and gave breath sample  Charged and later convicted with impaired driving

5.  Charter challenge  Lawyer argued Therens detained in police station and denied right to a lawyer  Guaranteed in s. 10 (Charter)  Supreme Court overturned conviction ruling test results wrongly obtained  Admit them would “bring administration of justice into disrepute”  Message: Supreme Court would exclude evidence if Charter Rights not respected.