"THE CHECKS WERE DISCOVERED BY DEFENCE LAWYERS LAST MONTH. THEY HAVE CREATED AN UPROAR OVER PRIVACY AND FAIR TRIAL RIGHTS AND LED TO TWO MISTRIALS AND THE DISMISSAL OF TWO JURY PANELS TOTALLING 240 PEOPLE.
THE LISTS HAD HANDWRITTEN NOTES BESIDE SOME NAMES, CITING CHARGES WITHOUT CONVICTIONS, HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT CONVICTIONS, AND ONE PERSON WHO OFTEN CALLS POLICE TO COMPLAIN.
SIMILAR COMMENTS SHOWED UP IN A THIRD BARRIE CASE, ANOTHER IN WINDSOR AND ONE IN THUNDER BAY."
REPORTER PETER SMALL; THE TORONTO STAR;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Background: In a previous post I asked: "Why didn't Ontario prosecutors examine Dr. Charles Smith's qualifications a bit more closely over the years, pay more attention to court decisions suggesting he was biased towards the Crown and that that his opinions were seriously flawed - or at least share the existence of these decisions with the defence?"
My answer was that some prosecutors cared more about winning the case than the possibility that an innocent person might be convicted;
I buttressed my response with the story recently broken by the National Post that prosecutors in several parts of Ontario have been asking police to do secret background checks on jurors.
This controversy has lead to numerous requests for mistrials and could result in a bids to open numerous cases where accused persons have been convicted in the shadow of the illegal practice which taints a criminal jury trial from the outset.
The Charles Smith Blog is very much concerned with the question as to how far prosecutors will go to win the case and therefore monitoring developments on a regular basis;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The unusual serving of subpoenas on court officials in connection with jurors lists is reported by the Toronto Star today in a story by reporter Peter Small which runs under the heading: "Court officials subpoenaed in jury scandal," and a sub-heading: "
Defence to seek stay in street racing case until 'abuse of process' motion is heard in court."
"A lawyer has served two Simcoe County court supervisors with subpoenas to explain how prosecutors received lists of potential jurors sooner than allowed by law," the story begins;
""Whether this impropriety was unintentional or fully endorsed by the supervising members of the office, it is clearly negligent, if not wilful misconduct," Toronto criminal lawyer Mitchell Worsoff said in an interview yesterday," the story continues;
"The move comes amid a widening scandal over police conducting background checks on potential jurors at the behest of the Crown.
Under the Juries Act, the sheriff's office must keep lists of candidates "under lock and key" until 10 days before the court sitting for which they were assembled.
Instead, in at least two cases at the Barrie courthouse, which serves Simcoe County, the Crown's office had the lists some weeks earlier.
"I don't know how long this practice has been going on and I'm also curious to know what safeguards are in place at this time so that it never happens again," Worsoff said.
He said he has issued subpoenas to Cheryl McCalmont, and Kathie Pouliot, both senior officials at the Simcoe County courthouse to testify at a hearing for his "abuse of process" motion, beginning Monday.
Worsoff will argue to have the case stayed against his client, Ravi Badhwar, accused of street racing in the 2007 death of trucker David Virgoe.
In several cases, including Badhwar's, the Crown sent jury lists to local police forces asking them to report on any "disreputable" candidates unsuitable to serve as jurors.
The checks were discovered by defence lawyers last month. They have created an uproar over privacy and fair trial rights and led to two mistrials and the dismissal of two jury panels totalling 240 people.
The lists had handwritten notes beside some names, citing charges without convictions, highway traffic act convictions, and one person who often calls police to complain.
Similar comments showed up in a third Barrie case, another in Windsor and one in Thunder Bay.
Since 2006, Crowns have been under orders by the attorney general to ask police to check only for the most serious criminal offences.
Ontario's information and privacy commissioner is probing whether privacy legislation was breached.
A spokesperson for the attorney general's office would not confirm whether breaches of the Juries Act had been committed.
But Kirk Munroe, a lawyer on a Windsor murder case derailed by the checks, says an outside body should be called in to investigate.
"Wherever the investigation leads it leads. If it leads to prosecution, so be it," Munroe added."
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
