Supreme Court ruling on Mr. Big sting gets mixed reaction

A criminal defence lawyer in Winnipeg is applauding theSupreme Court of Canada'sruling onso-called"Mr.Big"operations by police.

It calls for stricter rules on the way officers obtain confessions during those stings,in which undercover officers pose as criminals to draw confessions from suspects.

Winnipeg defence lawyer GregBrodskysaid the stings are not only wrong, but a form of entrapment.

• 'Mr. Big' stings get stricter rules from Supreme Court
• Murder victim's family launches drug-awareness foundation

"Tell me your secret, noone will know and I'm gonna pay you money and hire you. So why wouldn't you say that [confession] 'Sure, I did it. Yeah, pay me $80,000,'" he said.

The Supreme Court ruling on Thursday supports a 2012 appealcourt decision that overturned the 2007murder conviction of a Newfoundland man.

The high court saidhis rights may have been violated when he confessed aboutkilling his two young daughters to two undercover police officersposing as mobsters.

Unlike Brodsky, Winnipeg-based victims' rights advocate FloydWiebe is disappointed in the decision. Heis worried itcould impact police investigations and nullifylegitimateconfessions.

"I don't personally believe there's ever been a case in Canada, where a person has given a confession on a Mr. Big [sting]unless they had informationthat only that person knew that led to their conviction," he said.

Brodskysaid Thursday's ruling opens calls for reviews of all conviction cases in Canada associated with Mr. Big investigations.

"That's the process that we should go through right now. There are people that are still in jail who said that they weren't guilty, who need their convictions reviewed somehow," he said.