1. Criminal Trials: Players in the Courtroom and the Role of the Jury

3. The Players listens to everything said in court; Judge
gives a verdict; decides on the guilt or innocence of the accused (when there is no jury)
instructs the jury in matters of law and procedure (so that the jury can provide a verdict)
if the accused is found guilty, decides on the sentence
ensures rules of the courtroom are followed
Seat: In the front of Courthouse, facing everyone else

4. The Players continued Crown prosecutor
Hired by the government to ensure that justice is done
Burden of Proof – must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt
Must present all evidence
Seat: Faces the judge, sits at one of two tables in the middle of the courtroom between the Judge’s bench and the
Defence Counsel
Represents the accused to ensure that their legal rights are protected
Seat: Faces the judge, sits at table next to the Crown Prosecutor

5. The Players continued Court Clerk Court Recorder The Sheriff
Reads out the charge
Swears in witnesses
Tags evidence and handles much of the paperwork
Seat: In front of, and slightly off to the side, of the judge.
Court Recorder
Records everything exactly as stated
Seat: In front of the judge, and on the opposite side of the Court Clerk.
The Sheriff
Administration and pre-trial preparation
Make sure the accused appears in court
Finds jurors
Serves summonses and carries out court orders
Seat: At the front of the courtroom, to the far side near the prisoner’s box.

6. Jury in Canada
In Canada, the jury in a criminal trial comprises of 12 members. The jury is chosen by both the crown and the defence However jury array is governed by provincial legislation… Jury array  pool of potential jurors assembled under provincial legislation: also called jury panel or jury roll.

7. Qualifications
The Ontario Juries Act outlines the rules and procedures the juries and courts must follow…
People who can be Jurors:
Must be a Canadian citizen, at least 18 years old, and a resident of the province for at least one year
People who cannot be Jurors:
Elected officials and people working in the justice system such as lawyers, police, and probation officers, spouse of a lawyer or a police officer, medical doctor, Veterinarian, firefighter, MP, MPP, senator, cannot serve as jurors, or are attending law school
Officers and non-commissioned members of the military or reserves
People who are visually impaired, or with a mental or physical ability that serious impairs their ability to complete jury duty
Anyone who has served on a jury within the preceding two or three years
Anyone convicted of an indictable offence that has not been pardoned

8. The Jury
Individuals charged with a serious indictable offence have the option of trial before a judge and jury It is up to the jury to determine the facts of the case. At the end of the case the judge instructs the jury of the relevant law. Here the jury applies the law to the facts as it finds them

9. Empanelling
1) a list of jurors is created from the electoral list of people living in the area of the court
2) a selection committee headed by the sheriff picks 100 – 150 names from this electoral list: this is called a jury panel
3) people on this panel are summoned to appear at the court by notice; more people are called for more controversial cases – why? to ensure that those who are biased or who have already formed opinions about the case can be eliminated
4) Jurors are expected to have no knowledge or skill in the law
6) For what other reasons could you be excused from jury duty?
If you have a personal interest in the case (relationship with a trial participant); unable to speak the language spoken at trial; personal hardship (surgery); vacation or examinations (must submit proof); religious beliefs

10. Jury Challenges
Both the defense and the Crown have the right to challenge potential jurors. Why would both lawyers want to challenge jurors? The purpose of challenges is to create an impartial jury and to give the Crown or the defence equal opportunity to participate in the selection.

11. Jury Challenges
Two types of jury challenges which are available to the crown and defense…
Peremptory Challenge
Challenge for Cause

12. Jury Selection
Challenge for a cause is the right of the crown or the accused to exclude someone from a jury for a particular reason such as:
1) Already has formed an opinion about the case
2) Physically unable to perform jury duty
3) Has been convicted of a serious offence
Each side is given an unlimited number of challenges for a cause
Usually both legal teams will argue that the juror is not impartial.
Steps:
Potential jurors names from jury panel are randomly drawn
Person drawn goes before the court and faces the accused
Crown and defence may object to a potential juror
Either counsel may make a challenge for a cause

13. Jury Selection
A peremptory challenge is the right of the crown or the defence to exclude someone from a jury without providing a reason
Trial is an adversarial process with the state being the more powerful party – gives the accused to say “I really don’t want that person.”
20 challenges are given to each side for serious cases such as murder and treason
Less serious cases where the sentence will be less than five years in prison, only 12 challenges are granted
Lawyers usually make peremptory challenges on the basis of minimal information: the potential jurors name. occupation, address, physical appearance and demeanor.
Steps:
A juror could be accepted as suitable and impartial but still dismissed by the Crown or defence with a peremptory challenge
The 12 selected jurors take the juror’s oath

14. A reason for the peremptory challenge
Jury Selection
A reason for the peremptory challenge

15. Jury Duty Sworn in and take their seat in the jury box Jurors Oath:
to base verdict solely on the evidence
Come to decision in good conscience
Informed of their duties by judge
Jury appoints a foreperson
must not:
Discuss the case with non-jury members
Follow media reports about the case
Disclose any information from jury discussions
Must be unanimous (otherwise dismissed as a hung jury)
Usually you can go home at the end of each day unless sequestered – housed until they reach a verdict
Jurors may be discharged for valid reasons. If jury falls below 10 – new trial

16. Compensation
If you live more than 40 km from the court you will be given a travel allowance.
You are not paid for the first nine days
From days 11-49, the fee is $40.00/day
If you have to serve for 50 days or more, this increases to $100.00/day.

17. Employment
Employers are required to allow employees time off for jury duty.
They are not required to pay you while you are on jury duty, but some larger employers will.
If you are on E.I. you are allowed to receive benefits while serving on jury duty.
If performing jury duty would place an undue hardship on you because of your employment, business, schooling, or personal circumstances, you can make a written request to have your jury duty postponed to a later date.

18. Advantages of Jury Trial
Jurors become more aware of the justice system
Legal conflicts resolved by peers
Jury reflects conscious of society
Jury brings a fresh perspective to courtroom
Legal precedent maybe challenged
For the accused the jurors may empathize with the charge Juries more easily manipulated than a judge by a good lawyer
Chance of 1 of 12 rather than all or nothing

19. Advantages of Judge Alone Trial
Judges are more predictable
not swayed by emotions
not influenced as easily by lawyers
Many cases too technical for juries
Judges must give a reason for their verdict
Juries cost money
Jury verdicts may rest more on persuasive lawyers rather than facts and law
Jurors may be unduly influenced by factors such as the attitude or appearance off the accused, or nature of the offences

20. Runaway Jury https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c80vGyzA0LI
Film Clip
Runaway Jury

21. Jury Selection Challenging Racial Bias
R. v. Williams  read the case and answer the corresponding questions on pg. 295 – 296.
The trial judge argued that jurors would set aside their biases, that there were effective safeguards in place to deal with biases, and that the costs of allowing challenge for cause far out-weigh its benefit.
The Supreme court held that safeguards would not prevent deep-seated biases from effecting jury verdicts, and that examining prejudices was necessary for a fair trial as guranteed by the Charter.
A) impartial is defined as showing no more favor to one side than the other.
b) being able to challenge a large number of potential jurors is the best way to ensure an impartial jury
c) students might suggest that no one can be completely free from bias in that we all are the products of a broader society.