Law360 Canada ( January 4, 2021, 9:32 AM EST) -- Appeal by the accused from conviction for first degree murder of M. In 2015, the appellant killed three people. The police believed the three killings, only days apart, in this small community must be related. At the first meeting with the appellant, and every interaction thereafter, the police properly Chartered and cautioned the appellant, including advising him of s. 10(b) on each occasion. Eventually, the appellant confessed to killing B and his daughter but steadfastly denied any participation in the killing of M. While incarcerated awaiting trial, the appellant tried to commit suicide. An officer visited the appellant at the remand centre. During the conversation that followed, the appellant confessed to killing M. The appellant declined the invitation to meet with the same officer two months earlier. At the outset of the meeting the appellant was told that he did not have to stay and talk, that he was free to leave at anytime, that he was still a suspect in the M killing and that anything he said about that offence could be used as evidence. The Crown’s case against the appellant for killing M relied almost exclusively on his confession. The appellant argued the officer breached his right to counsel the day the appellant confessed to the M killing. The appellant argued the trial judge erred in finding that the police were not required to remind him of his s. 10(b) Charter rights as he was not detained....