amantha Silvio was charged with possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking under theControlled Drugs and Substances Actafter a quantity of cocaine was found in her apartment following a search authorized by a search warrant. Following the discovery of the cocaine, Samantha was read her rights and she made a statement to the police readily admitting that the cocaine was hers and that she intended to use the cocaine in making a special tea that helped to ease her acute asthma. Samantha's defence to the trafficking charge is that the cocaine was for her own use and that while she can be convicted of the lesser charge of possessing cocaine, she has not committed the offence of possession of cocaine for the purpose of trafficking.

At Samantha's trial, the Crown attempted to enter as evidence the statement made by Samantha to the police following her arrest. Samantha's lawyer objected to this testimony on the basis that the Crown is obligated to first prove that the statement was made voluntarily. What do you think of the lawyer's objection?