"“IT’S A VERY TROUBLING STORY. I’VE NOT HEARD OF IT BEING DONE BEFORE, SO THIS COMES AS A BIT OF A SURPRISE,” SAID KROG. “I THINK THAT THE JUDGE’S REACTION WAS THE APPROPRIATE ONE.”
THE OPPOSITION CRITIC IS A LAWYER BY PROFESSION, ALTHOUGH HIS PRACTICE BEFORE POLITICS WAS IN THE FIELD OF FAMILY LAW.
“THIS IS THE ONLY INSTANCE (OF JURY VETTING) THAT I’M AWARE OF,” KROG NOTED. “I SUSPECT THIS MAY BE THE LAST YOU’RE GOING TO HEAR OF THIS KIND OF ISSUE. A CAPABLE, PROFESSIONAL CROWN PROPERLY INSTRUCTED IS NOT GOING TO ENGAGE IN THIS.”"
REPORTER JOE FRIES; KELOWNA.COM;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
British Columbia's Justice Critic has spoken out against jury vetting, Kelowna.com reports.
"No public inquiry is necessary to investigate a report of jury vetting in Kelowna, but the B.C. Criminal Justice Branch must make it clear that this was an isolated incident, says NDP justice critic Leonard Krog," reporter Joe Friese's September 17, 2009 story begins, under the heading, "Jury vetting is ‘not what we do in British Columbia’: NDP critic."
"“I think it’s most important to articulate a clear policy that says this is not what we do in British Columbia,” Krog told Kelowna.com in response to recent reports of a jury panel that was sent home after a judge learned the Crown prosecutor on the case had looked into the backgrounds of potential jurors through a database of criminals," the story continues.
"“It’s a very troubling story. I’ve not heard of it being done before, so this comes as a bit of a surprise,” said Krog. “I think that the judge’s reaction was the appropriate one.”
The Opposition critic is a lawyer by profession, although his practice before politics was in the field of family law.
“This is the only instance (of jury vetting) that I’m aware of,” Krog noted. “I suspect this may be the last you’re going to hear of this kind of issue. A capable, professional Crown properly instructed is not going to engage in this.”
Kelowna.com asked for Attorney General Mike de Jong to comment on the matter, but was told he thought it more appropriate for the Criminal Justice Branch to handle the query. Spokesman Neil MacKenzie confirmed in an e-mail that the Criminal Justice Branch “has examined this situation and is taking steps to ensure that all prosecutors are aware of the role of the Crown in relation to this type of check.”
The provincial CORNET database, which tracks offenders in and out of custody, was used in this case.
“Conducting CORNET checks of those on a jury list is not a standard practice of Crown Counsel,” MacKenzie noted. ”The Criminal Justice Branch will co-operate to the fullest extent possible in dealing with any inquiries from the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner in connection with this case.”
Jury lists are compiled by local sheriffs and provided to lawyers from both sides in advance of a trial. It would be naive to think that names are never at least given a cursory check using commonly available tools, Krog said.
“We can’t stop people Googling…. You’re not going to stop that. But in terms of getting access to information of a private nature, that’s just not right,” he said. ”You should not give any more weight on the scales of justice to the Crown side that aren’t available to the defence. And clearly, I don’t think jury vetting should be practised on either side.”
CORNET use is governed by electronic access agreements. Kelowna.com was told it had to file a freedom of information request to look at one of the documents. The request is on its way."
The article can be found at:
http://www.kelowna.com/2009/09/17/jury-vetting-is-not-what-we-do-in-british-columbia-ndp-critic/
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com
