If you’re facing criminal charges, understanding how evidence is presented to a jury can be essential to knowing how the legal process unfolds. One unique part of criminal trials is the potential for a “view.” A view allows a jury to visit a location connected to the alleged crime to help them understand complex aspects of the case. Whether this happens, though, depends on several important factors.
Section 652 of the Criminal Code
Section 652 of the Criminal Code allows a judge to order a jury to visit a location or view an item related to a case if it is in the “interests of justice” and will aid their understanding of the evidence. The judge is responsible for directing the viewing, ensuring no one communicates with the jury during the process. Additionally, both the judge and the accused are required to attend the view, maintaining transparency and fairness in the trial proceedings.
- “The judge may, where it appears to be in the interests of justice, at any time after the jury has been sworn and before it gives its verdict, direct the jury to have a view of any place, thing or person, and shall give directions respecting the manner in which, and the persons by whom the place, thing or person shall be shown to the jury, and may for that purpose adjourn the trial.
- Where a view is ordered under subsection (1), the judge shall give any directions that he considers necessary for the purpose of preventing undue communication by any person with members of the jury, but failure to comply with any directions given under this subsection does not affect the validity of the proceedings.
- Where a view is ordered under subsection (1), the accused and the judge shall attend.”
Charged with a criminal offence? Call (855) 585-1777 to discuss your case with an experienced criminal lawyer.
Why Take a View?
There are several reasons why a judge might approve a jury view:
- Understanding Distances and Layouts: In cases where the location’s size, shape, or distance is important, a view can give jurors a better sense of scale. For instance, in R. v. Nasrallah (2012), the court permitted a view so jurors could see the layout of a gas station and accurately understand distances distorted by video footage.
- Clarifying Complex Details: If photos or diagrams aren’t sufficient, a visit might clarify details jurors need to understand.
- Providing Context for Actions: In certain cases, seeing a scene in person can help jurors understand movements or actions.
When Can a Jury Take a View?
A judge’s decision to grant a view is based on careful consideration of factors such as logistical feasibility, risk of bias, and whether the view will truly aid the jury. Here are some of the main factors a judge will weigh:
- Logistical Concerns: The location must be accessible and safe, and arrangements need to be made for secure transportation and supervision of the jury.
- Risk of Bias or Distraction: Exposure to a scene might lead jurors to form biases unrelated to the evidence. Potential distractions, such as public or media interactions, are carefully controlled. In R. v. Nasrallah, security measures were put in place to prevent interference during the jury’s visit.
- Adequacy of Visual Aids: Courts assess whether photos, videos, or models can sufficiently communicate the scene’s essential features without requiring a physical visit. In R. v. Browne (2017), the judge declined a view, determining that witness testimonies and visuals adequately represented the scene.
- Changes to the Scene Over Time: If the location has changed significantly, a visit might mislead rather than help the jury. In R. v. Rideout (1999), jurors were instructed to remember that the scene might not appear exactly as it had at the time of the incident.
- Fairness to All Parties: A view must not unfairly influence the jury in favour of either side. Judges consider whether the potential impact of a view might tilt the scales, rather than simply aiding in understanding the facts.
Accused of a crime? Speak with a dedicated criminal lawyer by calling (855) 585-1777 today.
The Interests of Justice
Section 652 uses the term “interests of justice,” a phrase commonly found in Canadian law. In this context, it’s a reminder that the judge must balance broader legal principles, like fairness and public confidence, with the specific circumstances of the case.
As Justice Doherty explained in R. v. Bernardo (1997), the “interests of justice” encompass both societal values and the rights of the accused. This broad perspective helps ensure that a view serves not only to clarify evidence but also to maintain the integrity of the legal process.
Legal and Ethical Considerations
The court must follow strict protocols during a jury view to prevent undue influence and maintain fairness:
- Ensuring Juror Neutrality: The jury must not interact with anyone outside their group, and the court typically arranges for court officers or security to accompany them. In R. v. Polimac (2006), the judge emphasized detailed planning to avoid undue communication with jurors.
- Judicial Instructions: Before and after a view, the judge typically instructs the jury to remember that what they saw is meant only to aid their understanding of the evidence, not replace it.
- Controlling the Scene: Judges often limit access to the location to only those directly involved in the trial. For instance, in R. v. Nasrallah, the area was secured to prevent public or media interference.
These protocols aim to ensure that a view remains a neutral and beneficial tool, not a distraction or source of unfair prejudice.
Don’t Face Your Criminal Charge Alone
An experienced criminal defence lawyer is vital when dealing with a criminal charge. They can guide you through the legal maze, safeguard your rights, and devise a robust defence strategy specific to your case.
Get a Free Legal Consultation With a Criminal Lawyer
Do not hesitate to contact us if you have been accused of a criminal offence. Call (855) 585-1777 and a skilled criminal defence lawyer will review your case with you and consider your alternatives.