 |
R. v. Budai, Gill, Kim
April 12, 2000
A publication ban was denied on a fresh evidence hearing in the
British Columbia Court of Appeal in the cases on which former juror
Gillian Guess sat. In weighing the Dagenais test, Mr.
Justice Donald noted:
[31] First of all, a new murder trial, if one is ordered, is a long
way off. The hearing of the appeal is not yet set down and it is
unlikely to be heard and decided until at least mid-autumn of this
year. Then the trial date would have to be fixed. Assuming no intervening
leave application and appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, a new
trial date is not likely to be less than six months after the appeal
decision. It is doubtful that the publicity surrounding this proceeding
would linger that long in the public's memory.
[32] Furthermore, there is nothing to suggest that the process of
jury selection, including challenges for cause, instructions to
the jury and similar safeguards would not assuage the risk of jury
contamination.
Donald J. later quoted Madam Justice McLachlin (now C.J.C.) in a concurring
judgment on Dagenais who wrote:
... What must be guarded against is the facile assumption that if
there is any risk of prejudice to a fair trial, however speculative,
the ban should be ordered.
See R.
v. Budai, Gill, Kim
|