The Criminal Court System Chapter 9

The Criminal Court Structure The Provincial Court System The Provincial Court, Criminal division Superior Courts of the Provinces The Federal Court System Federal Court of Canada Supreme court of Canada Other courts

The Participants Judge or jurors cannot convict an accused person unless they are satisfied that the Crown has proven the defendant’s guilt to the extent that a reasonable person would conclude that this individual did indeed commit the offence in question Any doubt – then the person must be acquitted

Judge The court official appointed to try cases in a court of law and to sentence convicted persons Controls the events in the courtroom Judge instructs jury on points of law In a non-jury trial, judge decides guilt or innocence of the accused

Justice of the Peace A court official who has less authority than a judge but who can issue warrants and perform some other judicial functions

The Defence Person charged with an offence – accused (defendant) Can represent themselves or can be hired a lawyer (duty counsel) Defence counsel – lawyer who defends an accused person on trial

The Prosecution The crown counsel (prosecutor) is the lawyer representing the government’s interest Must research the law, assemble the evidence for trial, review exhibits and take statements

Court clerk – assists the judge by keeping record of the trial exhibits, administering oaths, and announcing the beginning and end of the court session Court reporter – records everything verbatim that has been said during the trial After the trial a transcript is required (typed record of everything said in court) Court security officer – maintains courtroom security Sheriff – summons, pays, and guards jurors Bailiff – court official who assists the sheriff

Witnesses Prosecution or the defence may issue a subpoena which requires a witness to appear in court Failing to appear may be guilty of contempt and fined and/or jailed to 90 days Witnesses commit perjury if they make false statements in court – max penalty of 14 years

Jury Group of 12 men and women Chosen by the crown and defence counsel from a pool of ordinary citizens They listen to evidence and decide whether the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt or not guilty Decision must be unanimous

The Criminal Trial Process Burden of proof – the Crown’s obligation to prove the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt

The Crown’s opening statement Crown presents its case before the defence because it has the burden of proof Starts off with statement Identifies the offence committed summarizes the evidence against the accused Outlines the way the crown will present its case WILL ONLY PRESENT EVIDENCE AFTER ITS OPENING STATEMENT IS COMPLETE

Examination of witnesses First examination of a witness is called DIRECT EXAMINATION – the first questioning of a witness to determine what he or she observed about the crime After the examination, defence counsel may CROSS EXAMINE the witness – the second questioning of a witness to test the accuracy of the testimony; performed by opposing counsel

The Defence Responds When the crown has finished calling its witnesses, the defence may bring a motion for dismissal (a request by defence that the judge dismiss the charges against the defendant) Judge may agree with the defence and will withdraw the case from the jury to enter a directed verdict of not guilty – enters a verdict of not guilty

Defence then summarizes its case in an opening statement If the judge does not dismiss and the accused pleads not guilty, the trial must continue Defence then summarizes its case in an opening statement calls on witnesses Direct examination Cross examination Defendant may choose to testify on his/her own behalf but cannot be compelled to be a witness

After evidence from defence… Crown can rebut or contradict evidence introduced by the opposing side

Rules of Evidence During the trial – either the Crown or defence may object to questions asked or to answers provided by the witnesses When an objection is made, the judge rules on whether the evidence in question is admissible and whether it would be accepted by the Court

Leading question Suggests to the witness a particular answer During direct examination – generally not permitted to ask a witness a leading question unless it involves fairly unobjectable matter such as: You are 21 years old, aren’t you? Wasn’t it Tom you saw stabbing Al with a knife? (leading question needs rewording) What did you see Tom do to Al?

In cross-examination, counsel is allowed to ask a leading question as long as it pertained to previous testimony You want this court to believe you saw Tom stabbing Al? – this refers to a fact that was already established during direct examination

Hearsay Statements Evidence given by a witness based on information received from someone else rather than personal knowledge Ann told me that she saw Tom stab Al with a knife (would not be admissible in court)

Opinion statements Defence counsel or the Crown cannot ask the witness to give an opinion about a matter that goes beyond common knowledge Unless the witness is a recognized expert in field Example: eyewitness can give an opinion about the colour of the car at the crime scene But only a car mechanic who was allowed to examine car could give an opinion about the condition of car’s brakes

Immaterial or irrelevant questions No connection with the matter at hand – is inadmissible For example: murder trial if defence asks the investigating officer question about his life the question could be dismissed as being irrelevant

Non-responsive answers Sometimes the Crown or defence council will question a witness and receive a reply that does not really answer the question This is a non-responsive answer Counsel may ask the judge to direct the witness to answer the question properly

Types of evidence Direct evidence – testimony given by a witness to prove an alleged fact Eyewitness account is the most common Direct evidence can also be challenged Circumstantial evidence – indirect evidence that leads to a reasonable interference of the defendant’s guilt For example: Same stole Kates purse but no one saw him. They found the purse with his fingerprints. They can infer that he committed the crime. Evidence can still be used

Character evidence Evidence used to establish the likelihood that the defendant is the type of person who would or would not commit certain offence Generally the crown is not allowed to attack the defendant’s character (would push the jury to think this person has bad character - he/she must be guilty) Defence counsel can use evidence to show defendant’s good character to convince jury that he/she is not the type of person who would have committed the offence Crown is allowed to rebut it by presenting contradictory evidence (more about showing issues with credibility)

Voir dire A mini-trial in which jurors are excluded while the admissibility of evidence is discussed

Summary of the Case After all the testimony has been given, each counsel presents a summary of the case in their closing arguments Crown closes first, then defence Crown will attempt to show that the defendant’s guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt Defence will try to show that the crown has failed to establish mens rea or actus reus, thereby demonstrating that a reasonable doubt exists Not considered evidence, help jurors better understand the issues

Charge to the Jury The judge’s explanation to the jurors of how the law applies to the case before them After summaries of both sides Judge will also advice the jurors on how to consider the evidence and how to return a verdict in accordance with the law Jury is escorted out and they deliberate

The Verdict Once the verdict has been reached, it is read in open court Crown/defence can ask the jury to be polled – each jury member must stand and confirm that he/she agrees with the verdict A jury that cannot reach a unanimous decision is called a hung jury In this situation, jury is discharged, and a new jury is selected to try the case again