R v Jessup 2022 BCSC 2058
Co-counsel on extremely complex circumstantial second-degree murder and indignity to a body trial with Jay Michi, Jensen Law.
Held: Not Guilty of second-degree murder.
WYLLIE LAW
Elsa is a criminal defence lawyer dedicated to upholding the rule of law, with a career spanning high-stakes cases—including sexual assault and murder trials—and appearances at all court levels, notably the Supreme Court of Canada. Her expertise bridges global and domestic realms, holding an LLB (Otago), LLM (Columbia), and an MA in International Law (UK). She recently joined Church Court Chambers in London, UK as an Associate Member.
Internationally, she contributes to justice initiatives as part of the IBA War Crimes Committee, co-leading its 2025 Hague conference, and supports war crimes adjudication in Ukraine. Earlier experience at NATO, NORAD, and the UN in Rwanda shaped her grasp of power and accountability.
Driven by the 2020 racial justice reckoning, Elsa champions systemic legal reform, authoring influential work on racialized defences and securing a landmark 2024 human rights settlement ($50,000) for a Black man wrongfully accused of “threatening conduct.” A survivor of chronic pain from a car accident, she leverages lived experience into advocacy, speaking at forums like UBC’s Allard School of Law and the Trial Lawyer’s Criminal Law Conference.
Elsa serves on TLABC’s Equity, Diversity, Inclusion, and Criminal Defence Committees, embodying her commitment to justice through litigation, education, and reform.
Elsa's Recent Experience
R v Nahanee 2022 SCC 37
Appeared with Rebecca McConchie as an Intervenor for the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia.
Fact Summary: the Appellant plead guilty to two counts of sexual assault. The Appellant and the Crown made sentencing submissions, which were not joint submissions. The Crown sought a 4-6 year global sentence. The Appellant sought a 3-3.5 year global sentence. There was no guilty plea in exchange for joint submissions on sentence. The sentencing judge did not agree with the sentencing submissions, and imposed a sentence of eight years imprisonment. The sentencing judge did not alert counsel that she was intending to exceed the Crown’s proposed Sentence.
The overwhelming majority of provincial appellate courts have found that sentencing judges should provide counsel with notice and the opportunity to respond when they intend to exceed the Crown’s sentencing position; where there is a divide, it is on the appropriate remedy if notice is not provided.
The BC Court of Appeal stands alone in finding that it is not an error for a judge to exceed the Crown’s position without notice and an opportunity to respond, but even this court has stated that that procedure is “undoubtedly preferable”: R v R.R.B. BCCA 224 at [22].
The Court of Appeal dismissed the sentence appeal.
TLABC took the position on the appellant’s second question before the court:
- That the failure of a sentencing judge to alert counsel that they intend to exceed the sentencing ceiling proposed by Crown results in procedural unfairness requiring appellate intervention.
- It may also lead to the appearance of unfairness, another reason for the Court to hold that notice to the accused and an opportunity to respond is mandatory.
At the hearing, the Crown essentially conceded that notice should be given, so the hearing focused on the remedy, something that we addressed. TLABC’s submissions dealt squarely with the issue before the Court-namely that the only remedy for a breach of procedural fairness or the appearance of unfairness is a fresh sentencing analysis.
Executive of the International Bar Association War Crimes and Human Rights Committee
Elsa is currently involved with a broader IBA capacity building initiative in Ukraine regarding the adjudication of alleged war crimes, reviewing confidentially particular decisions with a view for identifying issues concerning compliance with international best standards.
She recently sat on the IBA Human Rights Law Committee Panel on Fair trial rights and the prosecution of alleged atrocities in Ukraine.
High-Level Panel of Legal Experts on Media Freedom
Selected to work on Amal Clooney’s U.K. and Canadian Joint Task Force.
Memberships
Elsa serves on the Board of Directors for the Trial Lawyers Association of British Columbia (TLABC) and sits on the Criminal Defence Committee, the Verdict Editorial Board, the Women Lawyer Retreat Committee, and the New Lawyers Committee. She is a member of the Criminal Defence Advocacy Society (CDAS) and the Association for Legal Aid Members (A.L.L).
Elsa is also active in international criminal law. She was recently appointed as the North American Liason Officer for the War Crimes committee, and serves on the executive of the Human Rights Committee of the International Bar Association. She serves as a Memorials Evaluator and Judge for the International Criminal Court Moot Court Competition. She is also a member of the International Human Rights Institute and the International Society for Criminal Law Reform.
Latest Publication
Click here for Elsa’s latest publication, “Recognizing Racialization, Reforming the Law and Raising the Bar.”
The fear of challenging race mythology is no doubt true for lawyers facing the decision to raise racialized defences. We know that racialized mythologies persist. Even the most unapologetic antiracist advocate would have to take serious pause in an era where calling out someone as racist is inexplicably more offensive than the racism itself…The risk we face by not using our voices is continuing to repeat what we do not repair. As we stand by, we risk clients foregoing their Charter rights for self-preservation.
*I would like to correct the reference I made in the article to “our Indigenous Peoples” to “Indigenous Peoples living in what is currently known as Canada.”