{"id":6108,"date":"2017-02-16T15:55:43","date_gmt":"2017-02-16T20:55:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/doyonavocats.ca\/detention-psychologique\/"},"modified":"2019-08-07T07:05:32","modified_gmt":"2019-08-07T11:05:32","slug":"detention-psychologique","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/detention-psychologique\/","title":{"rendered":"La d\u00e9tention psychologique"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">*Voir aussi notre <a href=\"https:\/\/doyonavocats.ca\/detention-pour-fins-denquete\/\">billet<\/a> sur la d\u00e9tention pour fins d&#8217;enqu\u00eate.<\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\">La d\u00e9tention psychologique : un bref rappel des notions applicables<\/h2>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/13430\/index.do\">R.\u00a0<i>c.<\/i>\u00a0Koczab,\u00a02014 CSC 9<\/a>\u00a0;\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/7799\/index.do\">R.\u00a0<i>c.<\/i>\u00a0Grant, 2009 CSC 32.<\/a>\u00a0;\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/7800\/index.do\">R.\u00a0<i>c.<\/i>\u00a0Suberu, 2009 CSC 33<\/a>\u00a0;\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/www.canlii.org\/en\/on\/onca\/doc\/1987\/1987canlii124\/1987canlii124.html\">R. v. Moran, 1987 CanLII 124 (ON CA).<\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Il y a d\u00e9tention psychologique quand l\u2019individu est l\u00e9galement tenu d\u2019obtemp\u00e9rer \u00e0 une demande contraignante ou \u00e0 une sommation, ou quand une personne raisonnable conclurait, compte tenu de la conduite de l\u2019\u00c9tat, qu\u2019elle n\u2019a d\u2019autre choix que d\u2019obtemp\u00e9rer.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Nul ne devrait \u00eatre priv\u00e9 d&#8217;invoquer que le policier n&#8217;avait pas le pouvoir en vertu de la loi ou de la <em>common law<\/em> de demander ou d&#8217;ordonner quelque chose parce qu&#8217;elle a ob\u00e9i, s&#8217;il n&#8217;y a pas eu d&#8217;indication claire de la part du policier que la personne est libre de refuser d&#8217;ob\u00e9ir. \u00c0 cause de la nature intimidante des actes de la police et de l&#8217;incertitude quant \u00e0 l&#8217;\u00e9tendue de ses pouvoirs, on ne peut consid\u00e9rer comme volontaire, au vrai sens du terme, l&#8217;ob\u00e9issance \u00e0 un ordre dans de telles circonstances.<\/p>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle; text-align: justify;\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/69\/index.do\"><em>Dedman c. La Reine<\/em>, [1985] 2 R.C.S. 2 au para. 59<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><!--more-->En l\u2019absence de contrainte physique ou d\u2019obligation l\u00e9gale, il peut \u00eatre difficile de savoir si une personne a \u00e9t\u00e9 mise en d\u00e9tention ou non. Pour d\u00e9terminer si une personne raisonnable plac\u00e9e dans la m\u00eame situation conclurait qu\u2019elle a \u00e9t\u00e9 priv\u00e9e par l\u2019\u00c9tat de sa libert\u00e9 de choix, l\u2019arr\u00eat <em>Grant<\/em> enseigne que le tribunal peut tenir compte, notamment, des facteurs suivants :<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A) Les circonstances \u00e0 l\u2019origine du contact avec les policiers telles que la personne en cause a d\u00fb raisonnablement les percevoir : les policiers fournissaient\u2011ils une aide g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, assuraient\u2011ils simplement le maintien de l\u2019ordre, menaient\u2011ils une enqu\u00eate g\u00e9n\u00e9rale sur un incident particulier, ou visaient\u2011ils pr\u00e9cis\u00e9ment la personne en cause dans le cadre d\u2019une enqu\u00eate cibl\u00e9e?<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">B) La nature de la conduite des policiers, notamment les mots employ\u00e9s, le recours au contact physique, le lieu de l\u2019interaction, la pr\u00e9sence d\u2019autres personnes et la dur\u00e9e de l\u2019interaction.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">C) Les caract\u00e9ristiques ou la situation particuli\u00e8re de la personne, selon leur pertinence, notamment son \u00e2ge, sa stature, son appartenance \u00e0 une minorit\u00e9 ou son degr\u00e9 de discernement.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle; text-align: justify;\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/7799\/index.do\"><em>R. c. Grant<\/em>, 2009 CSC 32, par. 44<\/a>.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>Moran<\/em> met aussi en lumi\u00e8re des facteurs utiles \u00e0 la d\u00e9termination de la question \u00e0 savoir si quelqu\u2019un est d\u00e9tenu psychologiquement<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In determining whether D has been <em>detained<\/em>, relevant factors include:<\/p>\n<ol style=\"list-style-type: lower-alpha;\">\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">the precise <strong><em>language<\/em><\/strong> used by the police officer in requesting the person who subsequently becomes D to come to the police station, and whether D was given a choice or expressed a preference that the interview be conducted at the police station, rather than at his\/her home;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">whether D was <strong>escorted<\/strong> to the police station by a police officer or came him\/herself in response to a police request;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">whether D left at the conclusion of the interview or whether s\/he was <strong>arrested<\/strong>;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">the <em>s<strong>tage<\/strong><\/em><strong> of the <em>investigation<\/em><\/strong>, that is, whether the questioning was part of the general investigation of a crime or possible crime or whether the police had already decided that a crime had been committed and that the accused was the perpetrator or involved in its commission and the questioning was conducted for the purpose of obtaining incriminating statements from D;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">whether the police had <strong>reasonable and probable grounds to believe<\/strong> that D had committed the crime being investigated;<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">the <strong><em>nature<\/em> of the <em>questions<\/em><\/strong> asked, <em>viz.<\/em>, whether they were questions of a general nature designed to obtain information or whether D was confronted with evidence pointing to his\/her guilt; and<\/li>\n<li style=\"text-align: justify;\">the <strong><em>subjective belief<\/em><\/strong> by D that s\/he is detained, although relevant, is <em>not<\/em> decisive, because the issue is whether D <em>reasonably<\/em> believed that s\/he was detained. Personal circumstances relating to D, such as low intelligence, emotional disturbance, youth and lack of sophistication are circumstances to be considered in determining whether D had a subjective belief that s\/he was detained.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle; text-align: justify;\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/www.canlii.org\/en\/on\/onca\/doc\/1987\/1987canlii124\/1987canlii124.html\"><em>R. v. Moran<\/em> (1987), 36 C.C.C. (3d) 225 (Ont. C.A.); leave to appeal refused [1988] 1 S.C.R. xi<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dans <em>Grant<\/em>, la Cour supr\u00eame rappelle ce qui suit\u00a0:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Dans <em>Suberu<\/em>, 2009 CSC 33, [2009] 2 R.C.S. 460, nous avons conclu que le droit d\u2019avoir recours \u00e0 l\u2019assistance d\u2019un avocat garanti par l\u2019al.\u00a010<em>b<\/em>)\u00a0 prend naissance d\u00e8s la mise en d\u00e9tention, que celle\u2011ci serve exclusivement ou non \u00e0 des fins d\u2019enqu\u00eate.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<ul style=\"list-style-type: circle; text-align: justify;\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/scc-csc.lexum.com\/scc-csc\/scc-csc\/fr\/item\/7799\/index.do\"><em>R.\u00a0c. Grant<\/em>, 2009 CSC 32, par. 58.<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>*Voir aussi notre billet sur la d\u00e9tention pour fins d&#8217;enqu\u00eate. La d\u00e9tention psychologique : un bref rappel des notions applicables R.\u00a0c.\u00a0Koczab,\u00a02014 CSC 9\u00a0;\u00a0R.\u00a0c.\u00a0Grant, 2009 CSC 32.\u00a0;\u00a0R.\u00a0c.\u00a0Suberu, 2009 CSC 33\u00a0;\u00a0R. v. Moran, 1987 CanLII 124 (ON CA). Il y a d\u00e9tention psychologique quand l\u2019individu est l\u00e9galement tenu d\u2019obtemp\u00e9rer \u00e0 une demande contraignante ou \u00e0 une sommation, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":12525,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[120],"tags":[],"yst_prominent_words":[],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6108"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6108"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6108\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/12525"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6108"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6108"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6108"},{"taxonomy":"yst_prominent_words","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.doyonavocats.ca\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/yst_prominent_words?post=6108"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}