Our client was charged with intentionally misleading a peace officer to enter on an investigation by making a false statement under Section 140 (1) (a) (2) (a) CCC. In this case, our client had gone out to a nightclub with her boyfriend at the time. Late at night, our client left the establishment accompanied by her boyfriend to return home. Our client was not driving the car. Afterward, a serious accident causing injuries occurred in downtown Montréal. The car in which our client was a passenger rolled over.
Following the accident, our client lied to the police about the circumstances of the accident in which she had been involved. She made three false statements on different dates. Given the context of the event and the wounded, we requested the preparation of a pre-sentence report during the entry of a guilty plea in court.
During sentencing, we emphasized our client’s young age. In fact, she was only 19 years old when the offence was committed. We demonstrated that our client was an administrative assistant and that, as part of her duties, she had to travel outside of Canada. In addition, we demonstrated that the impact of a criminal record would possibly cause her to lose her job. The Crown was not opposed to that aspect, but they were opposed on the grounds of public interest. The prosecution argued that granting our client a discharge would go against the public interest due to the context of the events, the wounded, and the three false statements to the police.
We demonstrated that our client had no criminal record and that she had expressed sincere regrets regarding the commission of the criminal offence. The court found that a well-informed member of the public would not lose confidence in the administration of justice since the conclusions of the pre-sentence report mentioned that our client did not have a delinquent personality structure and that her risk of recidivism was low – practically non-existent. The court concluded that the legal process had been very deterrent and that our client was a person of good character who maintained a prosocial lifestyle. The court also found that it was an error in judgment and an isolated incident attributable to our client’s lack of maturity.
The court accepted our request and granted our client a discharge conditional on her making a $700.00 donation to a charitable organization. Our client avoided a criminal record