Sponsored by EasyDNS https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord πΉShort Description: π EP#181 Joseph and Alper Yulmaz contrast Canadaβs self-defence (s.34) with U.S. castle doctrineβno duty to retreat, proportionality/necessity, and the modified objective test for homeowners. βοΈπ’ποΈ πMeta Description: π’ In EP#181 Not On Record explains Canadaβs self-defence s.34 vs U.S. castle doctrineβno duty to retreat, proportionality, stand-your-ground myths, and how courts assess reasonableness. π§π§ββοΈπ |Not On Record π π ππππ πππ ππππ πππππ ππππ! βΆ If you enjoy this video, please like it and share it. βΆ Don't forget to subscribe to this channel for more updates. βΆ Subscribe now: https://www.youtube.com/@NotOnRecord?sub_confirmation=1 β οΈ ππππππππππ: We do not accept any liability for any loss or damage incurred from you acting or not acting as a result of watching any of my publications. You acknowledge that you use the information I provide at your own risk. do your own research. βοΈ πππππππππ ππππππ: This video and my YouTube channel contain dialog, music, and image that are property of " Not On Record " You are authorized to share the video link and channel and embed this video in your website or others as long as a link back to my YouTube Channel is provided @NotOnRecord βΆ πππππππ ππππππππ:- #ep176 #notonrecord #hockeycanadatrial #hockeycanada #trialverdict #sportsandjustice #courtroomanalysis #legalpodcast #truecrimepodcast #canadianjustice #athletesandaccountability #legalverdict #sportslaw #highprofiletrial #realcasebreakdown #legalcommentary #truthandjustice #courtroomdrama #canadianlegalnews #justiceinspotlight #sportscontroversy #legaldiscussion #lawandorderpodcast #consentinsports #hockeynews2025 #legalanalysis #justiceforvictims #publicreaction #caseverdict #crimeandlaw #sportsintegrity Please share with your friends and family. Also don't forget to like, subscribe, and hit the notification bell to notify you if I post a new video. Much love and God bless Sponsored by EasyDNS https://easydns.com/NotOnRecord In this episode Joseph walks through Canadaβs self-defence law (Criminal Code s.34) and contrasts it with U.S. βcastle doctrineβ and stand-your-ground frameworks. With articling student Alper Yulmaz joining, they unpack proportionality and necessity, why Canada has no duty to retreat yet still weighs available options, and how courts apply a modified subjective objective test, considering the accusedβs size, experience, trauma history, and the context inside a home. Recent tragedies and high-profile charges are discussed without trial-by-media, along with Supreme Court guidance (e.g., Hodgson, Khill), to show that Canadian law is broader and more flexible than many think; designed to protect homeowners while avoiding blanket presumptions that can produce unjust outcomes. R. v. Hodgson, 2024 SCC 25 - https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2024/2024canlii11123/2024canlii11123.html?resultId=faf026722dfb4b3a9e3dc803930bbd9b&searchId=2025-09-07T08:08:30:114/750c412190cc49eba6030d6a4fba89fa R. v. Khill, 2021 SCC 37 (CanLII), [2021] 2 SCR 948 - https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/scc/doc/2021/2021scc37/2021scc37.html?resultId=106af67b2fdf4afd82ff35a092a71ebc&searchId=2025-09-07T08:11:40:226/e117a95adc244d88b9ab89e6f5053778
