An 18-year-old University of Victoria student found with seven cans of unopened beer in his backpack had a charge of being a minor with liquor in his possession under the Liquor Control and Licensing Act quashed.
The liquor was found after the student was leaving a student residence around 10 p.m. on Sept. 7, 2015, and his backpack was searched by two off-duty Saanich police officers working for the university to patrol the campus.
“UVic has a number of residences on campus for its students. At two times of the academic year, a problem at those residences arises. Those two times are in September and in April, the former for most students being the beginning of the academic year and when the problem at UVic is most acute and the latter being the end of the academic year coinciding with the end of examinations,” said B.C. Provincial Court justice H.W. Gordon in his decision.
“What occurs in September is that students in the residences, and some non-residence students, ‘party’. That partying usually involves the consumption of liquor. Some consume too much liquor and acts of mischief and vandalism result, most often pulling the fire alarm or damaging property in a residence.”
Gordon noted that when the officers saw the minor, identified as E.S., with a “boxy” backpack they assumed from its shape that it was a box of beer. Instead, they found seven cans of beer wrapped in a hoodie.
“In my view, E.S. had a reasonable expectation of privacy in his backpack and that it would not be subject to an arbitrary search,” Gordon stated.
“E.S. was on the grounds of a university where, from my own experience, and from living only a few blocks from the University of Victoria, it is a very common occurrence for students to be wearing or carrying a backpack. In my view, this search was more in the realm of a fishing expedition based on mere suspicion. In saying this, I do not suggest the officer was being officious. The officer was there to ensure the safety of students at or in the residences and the good order of the residences and the University. But in doing so, the officer was required to maintain the proper balance between that duty and respecting the rights of those on the campus to walk freely without interference.”
Image may be NSFW.Clik here to view.
