R v Beretov

The matter before the court was an appeal by the Crown against the suppression of a clandestine but lawfully recorded telephone conversation. The appeal concerned the admissibility of the recording, which was made during a police investigation into the respondent, Beretov, who was suspected of drug trafficking. The Crown sought to have the recording admitted as evidence in Beretov's trial. The legal issues for the court to determine were whether an inference of guilt could be drawn from Beretov's silence in response to an accusation during the recorded conversation and whether the court should apply a common sense test in determining the admissibility of the recording.

The court found that the common sense test, as applied in previous cases, was not a suitable test to determine the admissibility of the recording. The court held that the weight to be given to admissions in evidence should not be determined by a common sense test but rather by the traditional rules of evidence. The court found that the recording was inadmissible because the Crown could not establish a proper foundation for its admission. The respondent's silence in response to the accusation was not sufficient to establish an admission of guilt. The court held that the inference of guilt could not be drawn from Beretov's silence in response to the accusation, as it was not a clear and unambiguous admission of guilt. The court also found that the recording was obtained in an improper manner and that the respondent's right to a fair trial had been compromised.

The court's decision was that the pretext call could not be admitted in evidence in the trial. The court held that the recording was obtained in an improper manner and that the respondent's right to a fair trial had been compromised. The court found that the Crown had not established a proper foundation for the admission of the recording, and that the inference of guilt could not be drawn from Beretov's silence in response to the accusation. The court held that the recording was inadmissible and could not be used as evidence in the trial. The appeal was dismissed.