R v McLeod País/Territorio Canadá Tipo de la corte Nacional - corte inferior Fecha Sep 26, 1997 Fuente UNEP, InforMEA Nombre del tribunal The Queen's Bench Judicial Centre of Prince Albert Idioma Inglés Materia Especies silvestres y ecosistemas Resumen This case is an appeal of convictions and sentences on several charges of trafficking in, and possession of, white tailed deer, elk meat, white-tailed deer antlers, elk antlers, and hunting white-tailed deer without a licence, all contrary to the Wildlife Act. Judgement: 1) The charge of trafficking in deer antlers was dismissed. Contrary to the conclusion of the trial judge the appellant did not identify the American to whom he had sold the antlers. The definition of 'traffic' in s.2(y) of the Wildlife Act does not encompass 'giving'. There was no evidence that any sale took place on the date alleged. The date was critical in view of the six month limitation period for prosecutions of summary conviction offences. Admissions by the accused may prove decisive in linking an accused to illegal activity but there was no other evidence that the illegal transaction took place. 2) One conviction of hunting without a valid licence was dismissed while the other was upheld. The time period was critical because of the six month limitation period and the appellant still possessed a valid licence if the deer was shot before the date in question. 3) The appeal of the conviction for possession of elk antlers was dismissed. The appellant had argued that it was incumbent on the Crown to prove the manner in which the elk was shot was contrary to some specific prohibition such as out-of season, with a spotlight or in a prohibited area since the word 'poach' is not mentioned in the Act. It is generally accepted that 'poaching' means the illegal taking of birds or animals. Section 54 provides that the onus is on the person charged to prove the time and locality. 4) The conviction was set aside and the charge of trafficking in elk meat dismissed as there was no evidence to corroborate the statement made by the accused. 5) The appeals of the convictions for trafficking in deer antlers were dismissed. The photographs revealed that the antlers had portions of the deer skulls and were not naturally shed. 6) The sentence imposed on Count 3 was set aside and a fine of $750 was imposed with a forfeiture order. The $1,250 fine for trafficking in deer antlers was upheld as the appellant had a significant number of antlers in his possession. The time for payment was extended. (Provided by: UNODC SHERLOC) Texto completo www.unodc.org