"MUNROE (DEFENCE LAWYER) WANTED TO GET SMITH ON THE WITNESS STAND AFTER HE RECENTLY TOLD THE STAR THAT THIS WASN’T THE FIRST TIME OFFICERS DID BACKGROUND CHECKS ON POTENTIAL JURORS.
MUNROE ALSO TRIED TO SUBPOENA ASSISTANT CROWN ATTORNEYS TOM MEEHAN AND SCOTT PRATT, WHO WORKED THE HUARD AND ZOLDI CASE, ALONG WITH POLICE DETECTIVES FRANK PROVIDENTI AND MARK DENONVILLE, WHO DID THE BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR THE PROSECUTIONS.
THOMAS (JUDGE) QUASHED THE SUBPOENAS AND RULED THEY WEREN’T NECESSARY, GIVEN MOST OF THE INDIVIDUALS HAVE ALREADY TESTIFIED TO THEIR ROLE IN THE JURY VETTING BEFORE THE MISTRIAL WAS ORDERED, BECAUSE THEY WOULDN’T HAVE ANYTHING “MATERIAL” TO OFFER.
THOMAS ALSO DISMISSED A REQUEST BY THE DEFENCE LAWYERS TO RECEIVE INFORMATION ON ALL CASES BACK TO 1997 WHERE PROSECUTORS VETTED JURIES."
REPORTER TREVOR WILHELM; THE WINDSOR 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 is therefore monitoring developments on a regular basis;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Windsor Star's jurygate story ran earlier today under the heading: "Police Chief Smith not required to testify in Huard, Zoldi case."
"WINDSOR, Ont. -- A Windsor judge has ruled that Police Chief Gary Smith won’t have to take the stand and submit to questions about his department’s role in a province-wide jury vetting scandal," the story, by reporter Trevor Wilhelm, begins;
"The attempt to get Smith into court along with other police and prosecutors was part of a bid by a pair of defence lawyers to have first-degree murders charges against their clients Shane Huard and Richard Zoldi stayed," the story continues;
"Lawyers Kirk Munroe and Greg Goulin want the stay as a “remedy” after revelations that prosecutors did secret, detailed background checks on jurors.
Zoldi and Huard are charged with first-degree murder for the 2006 shooting of drug dealer Troy Hutchinson. Superior Court Justice Bruce Thomas declared a mistrial earlier this month after learning Windsor police had conducted background checks on more than 200 potential jurors. Thomas said when prosecutors secretly used police information during jury selection, they "tainted" the jury and compromised the suspect’s right to a fair trial.
Investigators used a confidential police database to identify undesirable jurors with such notations as "dislikes police," "family issues" and "criminal associates." The officers also singled out people they thought might be sympathetic to police. One woman picked for the jury is a Crown witness in another upcoming murder trial who has helped police in that case by turning over surveillance video.
Days after the mistrial, the province's privacy commissioner dispatched a team to Windsor to investigate the jury vetting and determine if citizens' privacy rights were violated. The team then went to Thunder Bay and Barrie where the practice had also been uncovered.
Zoldi and Huard are set to stand trial again, with a new jury selection to begin Monday. In the meantime, the hearing to have the charges stayed continues.
Munroe wanted to get Smith on the witness stand after he recently told The Star that this wasn’t the first time officers did background checks on potential jurors.
Munroe also tried to subpoena Assistant Crown attorneys Tom Meehan and Scott Pratt, who worked the Huard and Zoldi case, along with police detectives Frank Providenti and Mark Denonville, who did the background checks for the prosecutions.
Thomas quashed the subpoenas and ruled they weren’t necessary, given most of the individuals have already testified to their role in the jury vetting before the mistrial was ordered, because they wouldn’t have anything “material” to offer.
Thomas also dismissed a request by the defence lawyers to receive information on all cases back to 1997 where prosecutors vetted juries.
“I am convinced it will not add anything to the end result here,” he said."
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
