The Status Quo Process of Jury Selection Under Fire — fightthecharges.com

A person accused of a serious criminal offence, has the option to choose whether he or she wants to be tried by a judge alone or by a judge and jury. If the accused chooses the latter, then there is a process that takes place for jury selection. A Brief Outline of the Jury Selection Process Each court estimates the number of jurors they need for upcoming trials and sends the request to the Provincial Jury Centre (PJC). The PJC uses a computer program to randomly select jury panels from the jury roll. Criminal record checks are conducted through the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) on individuals randomly selected from the jury panel list. Those with a criminal record are removed from the list. Approximately 180,000 people in Ontario are summoned for jury duty every year. How are Jurors Selected? Jury panel members gather at the court location and on the date noted on their summons. The Court Services Officer divides them into groups for each trial that day. Panel members are then called into the courtroom so that all the parties can see the prospective jurors. Prospective jurors who are not selected may be assigned to another panel on the same day or asked to return the following day.Each panel member has an assigned number, which appears on a ballot card. Inside the courtroom, court staff randomly selects ballot cards and calls out the number of the panel member. In many courtrooms, these ballot cards are chosen lottery-style from a drum.Panel members are given the opportunity to let the court staff or the judge know of any difficulties they may experience in attending court on the date of their summons because of a change in address, illness, employment, schooling or a scheduled vacation. The judge may defer the panel member’s service to a later date, excuse the panel member or require them to serve on the jury. Whether selected for jury duty or not, panel members who attend court for jury duty are ineligible for jury duty for the next three years. Jury Selection in a Criminal Trial Twelve people sit on a jury in a criminal trial. The prospective juror goes to the front of the courtroom and faces the accused. At that point, the person is either accepted by each of the lawyers or rejected by one of them. The Crown and defence counsel can reject a limited number of prospective jurors without giving a reason. That is known as a peremptory challenge.In some cases, counsel pose a few pre-determined questions to each prospective juror to ensure that they will be able to decide the case free of prejudice or bias such as:Would your ability to judge the evidence in this case without bias be affected by anything you have heard or read about this case in the media?This is called a challenge for cause.If selected to serve on a jury, jurors go to the court location on the date and time specified by the judge. Most trials begin on the same day as the jury is selected and can last between a couple of days or a couple of weeks. Recent Proposals for Change Regarding the Jury Selection Process So what brings us to the purpose of this blog today? Well, since the acquittal of accused killer, Gerald Stanley, in the death of Colten Boushie, a 22-year-old Indigenous man, by an all-white jury earlier this year, the practice of peremptory challenges, has come under severe scrutiny.In the case of the Stanley trial, his legal team used peremptory challenges to dismiss every Indigenous candidate. While it is true that everyone has their own biases, it is improper for these to be determined solely on the basis of people’s appearances; that is a form of racial profiling. Rather, it is advised that a proper uniform interview process be put in place to better determine whether or not one holds biases that would impact the outcome of the trial. Biased jurors are more likely to be exposed by questioning them about their beliefs by inferring those beliefs from appearance and demeanour.A University of Alberta Professor, Steven Penney, has referred to peremptory challenges as, “arbitrary, unfair and potentially discriminatory”. It is fair to say that Indigenous people are seldom represented on the jury panel. This can be attributed to the historical discrimination against the Indigenous population, remnants of which are still felt in contemporary society. It is unclear how the status quo arbitrary dismissal of jurors by lawyers demonstrates fairness and justice. Where a lawyer has a valid reason to disqualify a potential juror, then he or she ought to be required to explain why.While advocates of peremptory challenges argue that the practice saves valuable court time and taxpayer dollars, the principles of fundamental justice and the Charter protected right to a fair trial should not be compromised in exchange for a time and money saving measure. This is especially so in Canada, where the state is interested in genuine reconciliation with the Indigenous population.At the very least, considering potentially alternative methods to peremptory challenges, that would incorporate principles of fundamental justice, would be a step in the right direction. Surely, the Stanley case is not the only one that has raised concerns with peremptory challenges. After all, Canada cannot meet its obligations to the Constitution, if it turns a blind eye to the problematic issues stemming from peremptory challenges.For more information on the Colten Boushie case, you may refer to: https://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/gerald-stanley-trial-jury-delivers-not-guilty-verdict-in-murder-of-colten-boushie

Read More