""THIS IS AN AFFRONT TO DEMOCRACY," SAID LAWYER EDWARD SAPIANO. "THEY GOT CAUGHT DOING SOMETHING WRONG AND NOW THEY ARE CHANGING THE RULES TO THEIR ADVANTAGE. IS THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL SAYING THAT SOMEONE WHO GOT CAUGHT STEALING A CHOCOLATE BAR YEARS AGO CAN NEVER SERVE ON A JURY," HE ASKED.
TORONTO DEFENCE LAWYER TYLER SMITH SUGGESTED THE PROVINCE HAS CRAFTED THE NEW LAW TO TRY TO REDUCE THE CHANCES OF ANYONE WHO MAY BE SKEPTICAL OF POLICE OR THE CROWN, FROM ENDING UP ON A JURY.
THE CHANGES IN ALBERTA AND ONTARIO COULD FACE CHALLENGES UNDER THE CHARTER OF RIGHTS, SAID UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA LAW PROFESSOR SANJEEV ANAND."
REPORTER SHANNON KARI: THE NATIONAL POST;
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"TORONTO -- The Ontario government has introduced legislation that will sharply limit who can serve as a juror in the province," the story by National Post reporter Shannon Kari begins, under the heading "Ontario moves to limit jury pool" and the sub-heading "Excludes most convictions."
" People convicted of relatively minor offences such as shoplifting, assault or mischief would no longer be eligible for jury duty under changes listed deep within an omnibus bill called The Good Government Act 2009," the story continues.
"The planned changes, which were not announced publicly, come after the province was forced to admit it had allowed police in some regions to probe the backgrounds of potential jurors.
The new rules would effectively make legal what some Crown offices were accused of doing before the Ontario Privacy Commissioner investigated the practice -- impanel juries made up of people who have never had a brush with the law.
Several lawyers contacted by the National Post were alarmed by the amendments, saying they would tilt jury trials in favour of the Crown.
The amendments are similar to a law enacted in Alberta last month that prohibits individuals even facing a criminal charge from serving on a jury.
In Ontario, people called upon to perform their civic duty will also be subject to background checks performed by police and court services staff within the Ministry of the Attorney-General, to confirm eligibility.
The proposed changes come a month after Attorney-General Chris Bentley stated "the buck stops here" and promised to follow the recommendations of Anne Cavoukian, the Ontario Privacy Commissioner.
Her investigation revealed that one in three Crown offices had engaged in improper background checks of potential jurors. Personal information was turned over by police only to the Crown to assist in jury selection, raising both privacy and fair trial issues.
The province called a halt to the jury checks and promised to protect the privacy interests of people called for jury duty in Ontario.
A short news release issued on Oct. 27 announced amendments to the Juries Act. It made no mention of the eligibility changes. Under the present Juries Act only someone convicted of an indictable offence (the most serious offences) is ineligible to serve as a juror. The amendments expand this restriction to cover anyone convicted of a "hybrid" offence. More than 90% of all offences in the Criminal Code, including minor charges, are considered hybrid in nature.
Valerie Hopper, a spokeswoman for the Ministry of the Attorney-General, said the amendments are to "update the language in the Act" and reflect that many indictable offences are now hybrid.
It is an explanation that is not sitting well with defence lawyers in the province, who were not consulted about the change in juror eligibility.
"This is an affront to democracy," said lawyer Edward Sapiano. "They got caught doing something wrong and now they are changing the rules to their advantage. Is the Attorney-General saying that someone who got caught stealing a chocolate bar years ago can never serve on a jury," he asked.
Toronto defence lawyer Tyler Smith suggested the province has crafted the new law to try to reduce the chances of anyone who may be skeptical of police or the Crown, from ending up on a jury.
The changes in Alberta and Ontario could face challenges under the Charter of Rights, said University of Alberta law professor Sanjeev Anand.
"This is really extreme. Basically, anyone ever convicted of a criminal offence will not be permitted to serve," observed Mr. Anand. "What is prompting governments to do this," he asked. "There is no evidence that someone with a criminal record will be a biased juror."
The amendments in Ontario will permit the "sheriff " to retain police to conduct criminal record checks to determine the eligibility of potential jurors, using the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) database. Other databases may also be accessed to assist in the record checks since CPIC requires a date of birth, which jurors are not required to disclose.
While the new bill refers to the "sheriff," the administration of jury lists in the province is administered by court services employees within the Ministry of the Attorney-General."
The story can be found at:
http://www.canada.com/news/story.html?id=2200746
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
