1. Case name and legal citation (including a link to a case publication).

2. What happened in the case? Provide an overview of the most important facts of the case, including all of the relevant people, actions, locations and objects

involved. Include only the material facts of the case need

to be included(i.e.the essential facts relevant to understanding key aspect of the case and outcome). DO NOT lose yourself in summary. Remember that the main purpose is to analyze the case and demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of course content.

Aim to tell the story of the

case without forgetting something important or

including something irrelevant. When outlining the

facts of the case, aim to establish a chronological timeline for the crime, from its commission, to investigation, to charges, arrest, trial, verdict, and sentencing.

3. What were the charges, the defence, and other essential elements that are critical to the case (i.e relating to the investigation, evidence, motive, mitigating circumstances, trial proceedings, connections to previous cases/precedents, etc.)

4. Whatlegal issues did the court (s) have to decide?

5 Which courts have heard the case already (i.e. what is its procedural history) and what was the judge (s) decision (i.e) What explanation did the court (s) give for its finding (s)? (i.e. The Ontario Courts, The Ontario Court of Appeal, The Supreme Court of Canada).

Here are just a few suggestions that model how to analyze some of the content you find:

• Was the charge or indictment an appropriate one? Why/why not? What other charges could have been laid?
• Analyze the actus reus and mens rea
• Were there any controversies regarding the investigation or procedural laws relating to the case?
• Do you agree with the defence strategy? Why or why not? Was it fair? Was it effective?
• Was the evidence effective? Questionable? Do you think critical evidence was withheld from the trial, that should have been included?
• Do you recognize any Charter applications? How were the rights of the victims vs. the rights of the accused met?Do you think the process was just? Fair for the defendant? Fair for victims?
• Was the sentence fair and/or effective? If there were multiple charges and convictions, do you think it should have been a concurrent or consecutive sentence? Does it reflect philosophies of retribution, rehabilitation, or restitution?
• Was the verdict challenged? Was it upheld or overturned on appeal? If so, why so? Did it make its way to the Supreme Court? Did you agree or disagree with these alternate or sustaining judgements?
• Did this criminal case also result in subsequent civil trials? If so, how did these turn out?
• Can you make connections to other similar cases that are relevant to your analysis (i.e. previous precedent setting cases or cases that use this one as precedent)?
• Do you think this case exposed any failings of our legal justice system? Or perhaps, how do you think this case proves the that our system is fair and functional?

PART B

6. The final section of your analysis should include a personal reflection on the case overall. Take the perspective of a judge or juror hearing the case. What would your verdict and/or sentencing have been and why? What other factors would you have taken into consideration?