"THE NOVA SCOTIA COURT OF APPEAL IS EXPECTED TO HEAR THE APPEAL IN EARLY JUNE. ALSO THAT MONTH, THE ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL IS EXPECTED TO DECIDE ON THE NEXT STEP IN NEARLY A DOZEN APPEALS, INCLUDING CASES AS SERIOUS AS MURDER, IN WHICH IMPROPER JURY VETTING WAS CONDUCTED BY THE CROWN AND POLICE."
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;
Harold Levy;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal is being asked to overturn a marijuana grow-operation conviction because of secret background checks conducted by Halifax police and the RCMP into potential jurors," the National Post story by reporter Shannon Kari, published earlier today, under the heading, "N.S. court to hear appeal on jury vetting" Defence Not Told; Dismissal of charges over grow-op sought," begins.
"Kevin Hobbs was convicted by a jury in Halifax on June 1, 2009, just a few days after the National Post first reported on the practice of improper jury vetting by police and provincial Crowns in some jurisdictions in Ontario," the story continues.
The misconduct in this case was not only against Mr. Hobbs, it was against the members of the jury pool who had their privacy violated," states defence lawyer Luke Craggs in written arguments filed in the Court of Appeal on April 15.
While both the federal and provincial Crown offices in Nova Scotia have updated their policy manuals since the jury vetting practice in Ontario was exposed last year, Mr. Craggs says the charges against his client should be thrown out to send a message about the seriousness of the misconduct.
"While one would hope that future jury pools would take comfort in knowing that new policies have been implemented, it may be difficult for them to overcome the sense the Crown is an all powerful entity which doesn't have to respect the rights of jurors," writes Mr. Craggs.
In the prosecution of Mr. Hobbs, four confidential databases were searched by two members of the Halifax Regional Police and the RCMP Integrated Drug Section, along with two civilian assistants. Overtime pay was approved because of the time consuming nature of the searches.
The Supreme Court of Canada has stressed on several occasions that the Crown and defence are permitted very little information about potential jurors, unlike the United States where they can be questioned at length.
The information obtained from the databases, including whether individuals had any contact with the criminal justice system, was shared only with federal Crown attorney James Whiting.
There is no provision in the Nova Scotia Juries Act that provides for background checks by police. As well, an individual must have been previously convicted of an offence and sentenced to more than two years in prison to be ineligible to serve as a juror.
In a ruling released last week, the Court of Appeal refused a request by Mr. Craggs to cross-examine Mr. Whiting about the jury vetting.
The federal Crown and police instead submitted written explanations and maintained it was to ensure that individuals were eligible to serve as jurors.
Noting that the only specific request in the searches was to see if potential jurors had any drug-related criminal record, Mr. Craggs disputes the explanation.
"What purpose other than obtaining a strategic advantage in jury selection could the background checks have served," he writes.
The Nova Scotia Court of Appeal is expected to hear the appeal in early June. Also that month, the Ontario Court of Appeal is expected to decide on the next step in nearly a dozen appeals, including cases as serious as murder, in which improper jury vetting was conducted by the Crown and police."
The story can be found at:
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=2923487
Harold Levy...hlevy15@gmail.com;
