The application of s.8 states that there must be a subjective expectation of privacy that is objectively reasonable.There are several factors involved, including the subject matter itself, where the communication occurred, and how much control the person had over who is exposed to the information.These factors can each be interpreted differently, which presents the possibility of different outcomes depending on how the law is applied. In the cases of Marakah and Mills, we see that the subject matter played a role in the outcome of the cases. Marakah had a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding gun trafficking, Mills did not have a reasonable expectation regarding his sexual communication with a minor. When should the subject matter of the crime change our expectation of privacy? To answer this question, think about what should happen in the following two cases? (Don't worry about how the law is applied in court - think about what you think should be the outcome.) Case A: Andromeda texts her sister and asks for help getting rid of the gun she just used to shoot her husband. Andromeda asks her sister to erase the text and erases the text from her own phone. Unknown to Andromeda her sister does not erase the text. Did Andromeda have a reasonable expectation of privacy? Case B: Hannah writes an email to a friend asking for help. Hannah "borrowed" some money from the petty cash at work which she intended to return. However, months have gone by and Hannah does not have enough money to replace it. She is worried her boss is about to discover what she has done. Hannah asks her friend to erase the email after their conversation. Instead, the friend accidentally forwards the email to the entire office. Did Hannah have a reasonable expectation of privacy