 Generates competition between Crown and defence  Aim of both is to seek justice  Crown- Burden of proof is on the Crown to “prove case beyond a reasonable doubt”  Defense- is charged with the legal responsibility of providing a proper legal defense  Judge and/or Jury weigh facts and determine guilt or innocence

 Certain principles underlie all criminal trials in Canada  These principles are intended to guarantee fairness and, in particular, to strike a balance between the power of the state and the civil liberties of the accused.

 Rule of Law  No one is exempt from the law and it applies to all  Specific Allegation  Specific charge under the Criminal Code under specific circumstances  Case to meet  Crown Attorney presents evidence first and bears the burden of proof  Accused cannot be forced to testify  Reasonable doubt  Implies an honest or moral doubt as to whether the accused is guilty of the crime  Acquittal  Meaning declared not guilty

 Presumption of Innocence  Innocent until convicted at trial  Disclosure  Involves providing the defense with all relevant information to defend a charge  Open and Public Trial  Justice must be seen to be done  Independent and Impartial Adjudication  Both judges and juries must be open-minded  Recuse –judge steps aside if conflict of interest

 Crown attorney  Exercises strict adherence to rules and procedures governing administration of justice  Defense attorney  Main role is to prepare proper legal defense for accused Compiles statements from client Compiles information disclosed by Crown Uses case law to prepare a defense

 Judge  Impartial  Trier of law  Trial without jury Determines credibility and admissibility of evidence

 Witnesses  Evidence is presented through Crown and defense witnesses  Witnesses used to substantiate claims made at trial  Crown and defense allowed cross examination  Perjury- witness could be charged for lying under oath

 Jury  Ordinary citizens that ensure justice is served  Selected at random from potential voter’s list  Once selected, potential jurors required to complete a questionnaire  Must meet several criteria to be part of jury panel eg. Must not have been convicted of an indictable offense Exempted if a person is a police officer, lawyer, Doctor or Vet.

 Jury panel Can be challenged (removed by Crown or defense) Challenge for cause (questions of juror being biased) Peremptory challenge (removed without explanation)  Number of peremptory challenges varies by seriousness of charge  Judge and jury trial Judge charges the jury (instructs on law and how it applies to case) Jurors considered “triers of fact” Jury deliberates to determine verdict

 Evidence is the way in which the Crown and the defense try to reconstruct the chain of events.  The evidence tries to convey the facts to the court so that a judgement can be announced.  Only relevant evidence is usually admissible  Evidence can be excluded from the trial if proper procedures during the investigative process are not followed.

1) Direct Evidence:  Evidence given by a witness  Usually a verbal description of what the witness knows about the events  The way a witness describes and interprets the event depends on the individual’s personal filters (what they saw, heard, smelled or felt about an event)  Eye witness evidence: BIU BIU

 The witness first tells his/her story to the court in examination in chief  Examination in chief: oral examination of witness by the lawyer who summons the witness to testify  The witness is then cross-examined by the opposing lawyer  Cross examination: oral examination of a witness by a lawyer who did not summon the witness to testify, designed to challenge the witnesses’ evidence

 Indirect evidence that links the accused to the crime  For example, something belonging to the accused may have been left at the crime scene but there is no direct evidence to prove that the accused actually committed the crime.

 Aka. “Real evidence”  evidence that consists of physical objects that can be offered into evidence.  Example: The cookie jar with the child’s fingerprints on it.  Other typical examples…  weapons,  tools,  tool markings,  fingerprints,  blood, hair, skin samples

 Hearsay: Evidence consisting of matters that witness was told  Witnesses cannot testify about indirect knowledge Example:  Daniel assaults Dylan  Paul was there to see it  If Jesse testifies that Paul told her that Daniel assaulted Dylan it is deemed second hand information and therefore hearsay

 A mini-hearing held during a trial on the admissibility of challenged evidence  Example: a defendant may object to a plaintiff’s witness. The court would suspend the trial, immediately preside over a hearing on the standing of the proposed witness, and then resume the trial with or without the witness, or with any restrictions placed on the testimony by the judge as a result of the voir dire ruling. In a jury trial, the jury would be excused during the voir dire.

 Read pages (be sure to read “The Wrongful Conviction of Guy Paul Morin)  Answer questions: #1-3 on page 326 #11,12, 17, 18 on page 327 Define: stay of proceedings, motions for adjournment, challenge for cause, peremptory challenge, victim impact statement