THE LEGACY OF REGINA V. WRAY

Abstract

The rules of admissibility governing confessions produce significant controversy at criminal trial and appeal proceedings. Recent decisions appear to have changed the law governing the voluntariness of confessions, by finding a judicial discretion to exclude even where the confession is not extracted by fear, threats or inducements. It is the author’s contention that, despite resting on underlying principles very different from the traditional view, there is a lack of discussion in the cases as to how those principles function. This article surveys the development of the exclusionary rule, forming a backdrop against which to discuss judicial conclusions about the rule that are found in the culminating case of Regina v. Wray. It concludes with the implications of that case.