R.D.S. V. HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN: A CASE ABOUT HOME

A white police officer arrested a black 15-year-old who had allegedly interfered with the arrest of another youth. The accused was charged with assaulting a police officer, assaulting a police officer with the intention of preventing an arrest, and resisting a police officer in the lawful execution of his duty. The police officer and the accused were the only witnesses and their accounts differed widely. The Judge weighed the evidence and determined that the accused should be acquitted. While delivering her oral reasons, the Judge remarked , in response to a rhetorical question by the C rown, that p olice officers had been know n to mislead th e court in the past, that they ha d been kno wn to overreact pa rticularly with non-w hite groups, a nd that wo uld indicate a “state of mind that is questiona ble.” She also stated that her comments were not tied to the police officer testifying before the court. The Crown challenged these comments as raising a reasonable apprehension of bias. After the reasons had been given, and after an appeal to the Nova Scotia Supreme Court (Trial Division) had been filed by the Crown, the Jud ge issued supplementary rea sons which outlined in greater detail her impressions of the credibility of both witnesses and the context in which her comments were made. The Crown’s appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered on the basis that the Judge’s remarks gave rise to a reasonab le apprehen sion of bias. Th is judgment was upheld by a majority of the Nova Scotia Court of Appeal. At issue here is whether the Judge’s comments in her reasons gave rise to a reasonable apprehension of bias.