 These principles are intended to guarantee fairness and strike a balance between the power of the state and the civil liberties of the accused. 1. Rule of Law ◦ Individuals can only be punished for breaches of the law, and that all citizens are equal before the law. Additionally, the law must be easily discoverable by citizens. 2. Specific Allegation ◦ The right to know what you have been charged with and what specific circumstances are alleged to make up the offence.

3. Case to Meet ◦ The Crown must have a strong enough case for conviction. The Crown:  Presents evidence first;  Bears the burden of proof;  Must prove its case without relying on the accused to testify because they have the absolute right to remain silent. 4. Presumption of Innocence ◦ The Crown must prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt before it is appropriate to punish. If there is any doubt, the accused is entitled to an acquittal. 5. Open and Public Trial ◦ All criminal trials are open to the public and media. 6. Independent and Impartial Adjudication ◦ Judge and jury must be impartial and have no personal interest in the outcome of the case. Decision must be based on the facts and the law.

 The Criminal Trial is an adversarial process that pits the Crown against the accused.  Each person charged with an offence, under Sect. 11 of the Charter, is “presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law.”  This places the burden of proof (whomever has the obligation to prove the guilt of the accused) on the Crown.  Proof of guilt must be beyond a reasonable doubt.  The first step in the trial is the ARRAIGNMENT – the reading of the charge to the accused, and the accused entering either a plea of guilty or not guilty.  The Judge then explains the role of the jury, and then the selection of a foreperson who will represent the jury and communicate with the judge takes place.

 The Crown presents first because it has the burden of proof.  The trial always begins with the Crown’s opening statement, which  Identifies the offence committed;  Summarizes the evidence against the accused; and  Outlines the way the Crown will present its case.  The opening statement is not evidence; the Crown will introduce evidence only when the opening statement is complete.

 Most of the evidence presented in a criminal trial is presented through witnesses.  The first examination of a witness is called a DIRECT EXAMINATION.  The purpose is to determine what the witness observed about the crime;  After the direct examination, the defence counsel may cross-examine the witness to test the accuracy of the evidence or to convince the jury that there are contradictions in the witness’s testimony that weaken the Crown’s case.

 When the Crown has finished with its witnesses, the Defence may bring a MOTION FOR DISMISSAL – a request that the judge dismiss the charges against the defendant because the Crown has failed to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.  If the judge agrees, he/she can enter a DIRECTED VERDICT - to withdraw the case and enter a verdict of not guilty.

 If the trial proceeds, the defence begins by summarizing its case in an opening statement;  It is during the opening statement of the defence where the defence of the accused is also stated.  The defence can also call witnesses to refute testimony provided by the Crown’s witnesses, or show reasonable doubt.  The procedure of direct examination (by the defence) and cross-examination (by the Crown) is repeated.  The defendant does not have to testify.  After the defence had presented all its evidence, the Crown has the opportunity to rebut, or contradict, any new evidence the defence has introduced;  The defence can then present further evidence for a surrebuttal – a contradiction of the Crown’s rebuttal.

 During the trial, either the Crown or the defence may object to questions asked by the opposing attorney or to answer questions provided by witnesses. ◦ When an objection is made, the judge has to make a decision as to whether or not the evidence in question is “admissible”, or accepted by the court.

 LEADING QUESTION:  A question that suggest the witness to provide a particular answer during a direct examination (usually a “yes” or “no”).  For example “Wasn’t it Jag you saw holding a knife and stabbing Dalton?” is a leading question. This would prompt a “yes” or “no” answer, and would need to be reworded to “What did you see Jag do to Dalton?”  Leading questions are not allowed in direct examination, but ok in cross-examination.

 HEARSAY STATEMENTS ◦ Witnesses can only be asked about what they saw or experienced first-hand, not about what they heard from a third party. ◦ For example “Jon told me he saw Jag stab Dalton” would be hearsay, and is not admissible.  OPINION STATEMENTS ◦ Witnesses cannot be asked to give an opinion about matters that go beyond common knowledge unless the witness is a recognized expert in the field. ◦ For example, only a car mechanic could give an opinion about the condition of a car’s brakes.

 IMMATERIAL OR IRRELEVANT QUESTIONS ◦ These questions have no connection with the matter at hand and are therefore inadmissible; ◦ For example, in a murder trial, if the defence counsel asked the investigating officer a question about his personal life, the question may be dismissed as irrelevant if it has no bearing on the case.  NON-RESPONSIVE ANSWERS ◦ When a witness provides a response that does not really answer the question. ◦ When this happens, the judge might instruct the witness to answer the question properly.

 There are many different types of evidence that can be introduce to a case, however all evidence must be “material” – important and relevant to the case in question.  Types of evidence include:  Direct evidence – evidence that directly links the accused to a crime, such as a witness  Physical evidence – i.e. samples of bodily fluids, such as blood, semen, hair, fibre samples, fingerprints, or weapons found at the scene;  Circumstantial evidence – evidence that indirectly links the accused to the crime, i.e. 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

1. Self-incriminating  Evidence that would directly or indirectly help to prove the guilt of the person giving the evidence in a different proceeding;  Evidence that a witness has provided in one court cannot be used against him/her in another criminal court case, unless they have perjured themselves. 2. Privileged communication  Confidential communications that cannot be required to be presented in court as evidence AGAINST the accused i.e. between a husband and wife, doctor and patient, lawyer and client.  If the person giving the confidential information agrees, then the information can be presented;  If the person in the position of power in the relationship, such as the doctor in a doctor-patient relationship, provides the evidence, then the privilege is nullified, and can be used in court.

3. Similar fact  Evidence that shows the accused has committed similar offences in the past;  To be used, it must be relevant to the case;  Helps to discredit the accused's past, and can be extremely damaging to the accused's case. 4. Hearsay  Something that someone other than the witness has said or written, i.e. Sam said she heard Kristin say that she killed Jabari.  Is usually inadmissible, however may be admissible if it's being used as proof that statement was actually made, or if the witness is quoting a person was dying, as long as the evidence would have been admitted if the person had lived.

5. Opinion  Evidence provided by an expert witness regarding specific facts in a case;  Is inadmissible unless the witness is an EXPERT – i.e. Only a car mechanic can give an opinion about the condition of a car’s breaks. 6. Character  Evidence used to establish the likelihood that the defendant is the type of person who either would or would not commit a certain offence.  The Crown cannot introduce evidence of a person’s bad character UNLESS the defence introduces evidence of a person’s GOOD character first.

7. Electronic surveillance  The use of any electronic device to overhear or record communications between two or more people, such as wiretapping, bugging, and video surveillance;  Any evidence obtained by wiretapping, bugging and video surveillance of a person or his/her property requires a search warrant and a judges authorization;  Video surveillance evidence is admissible without a warrant if its of a public place;  A warrant is also not necessary if the police officer believes and can prove that the situation is an emergency or necessary to prevent a violent act. 8. Polygraph  Are considered hearsay and inadmissible as evidence, however anything the defendant says during the course of the test may be introduced as evidence.

9. Photographs  may be entered if they can be identified as an accurate portrait of the crime scene;  Often the photographer and film processor take the stand to describe how the photographs were taken and processed. 10. Confessions  An accused person’s acknowledgement that the charge, or some part of the charge, is true.  A confession can be INCULPATORY – an admission, or EXCULPATORY – a denial.  If the confession is not voluntary, it can be rejected.

 When a question about the admissibility of evidence arises in court, a voir dire is held. A voir dire is a trial within a trial to determine whether or not the evidence is admissible. If there is a jury present, the jury is removed; if the evidence is considered admissible, they are given the opportunity to consider it. If inadmissible, the jury will not be told of the evidence.  Any evidence that has been illegally obtain is also inadmissible

 After all testimony and evidence has been presented, both sides present a summary of the case in the form of closing arguments;  If the defence called witnesses during the trial, then they close first. If not, the Crown closes first.  The Crown has to show that guilt has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt;  The defence will try to show that the Crown has failed to establish actus reus and mens rea, so reasonable doubt exists.  Intended to help the jurors understand the issues involved in the case better.

 After the summations are presented by both sides, the judge will charge the jury – explain the law and how it applies to the case before them.  The judge will also advise on how to consider the evidence and how to return a verdict in accordance with the law.  After the charge has been given, the sheriff takes the jury to the jury room where they can deliberate their verdict.

 Judge’s role is to decide on matters of law; the jury’s role is to decide on matters of fact.  The judge rules on what evidence is admissible; the jury decides what evidence is believable; If there is any doubt, or if the jury doesn’t know who to believe, they must acquit (provide a verdict of not guilty)

 Once the jury has decided on their verdict, it is read in open court.  The Crown and defence can ask to poll the jury, and each jury member must then stand and state whether they agree or disagree with the verdict.  A jury’s verdict must be unanimous.  A jury that cannot make a unanimous decision is a HUNG JURY – a new jury will then be selected and the trial will occur again.