Law enforcement officers are the forefront people in many difficult situations involving the protection and security of the citizens. They must have adequate knowledge, skill, and judgment within their practice and be quick to critically analyze situations and work accordingly taking into consideration the law and the charter of rights and freedom. At times when law enforcement officers do gather enough evidence and is able to show that an individual has in fact committed an indictable offence but it violates the rights of the individual the case may work against the officer. In the case of R v. Feeney, it forever changed police searches and seizures for suspected criminals and evidence in Canada. This essay will start off by analyzing the R v. Feeney case. Furthermore, it will summarize the changes made to the criminal code of Canada as a result of the ruling. Lastly, how these changes have effected policing both positively and negatively in Canada will be discussed. In 1991 Michael Feeney was held accountable for the death of Frank Boyle. Frank Boyle, aged 85 years was found beaten to death in his home involving five blows to his head with a metal rod. Officers arrived at the scene and noted blood splattered everywhere in the residence, and a pack of Sportsman cigarettes amongst…show more content… He argued that the police officer forcefully arrested him in the privacy of his home without a warrant. Moreover, even though Feeney’s rights were read to him he argued that he was not given adequate amount of time for him to get a counsel or even given access to a counsel before they started to question him. He also argued that only after questioning him, the police officers were able to get more information in regards to other evidences that can be used in court, which violates his right in section 24
