Murder trial. Issue regarding proof of voluntariness of statements made by the accused during a lengthy police interrogation. Several times over a more than two hour period during the questioning, the accused asked to use the washroom, saying that he had to pee. Police ignored accused’s repeated requests in this regard.

Held: Portions of the statements inadmissible.

“Reasonable access to a washroom, like provision of food, is a fundamental physical necessity that must be accommodated and arranged by the police for interviewees. It appears that Mr. Frank had been interviewed for over two hours without a washroom break when he first expressed the urge to relieve himself … Mr. Frank’s repeated requests raise a doubt as to whether his will was overborne.”

T. Roulston, A. Urquhart – Defence Counsel