The fact that an accused has failed to appear doesn't say he has been convicted of a criminal offence of failing to appear. That expands it, no question in my submission. How is this interpreted? Whether or not there is a new thrust on crown counsel not to follow the law as it is, as guided by the courts, in the Morales and Pearson decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, is something I'm concerned about.
On April 4th, 2017. See this statement in context.