Ensuring Fairness and Objectivity in Sexual Assault Trials

The justice system needs to ensure fairness and objectivity in trials, especially in sexual assault cases, to prevent wrongful convictions and charges 

Questions to inspire discussion 

• What is the podcast episode about?

  —The podcast episode discusses the limitations on certain words and topics in court cases.

• What is the speaker's main concern about the justice system?

  —The speaker emphasizes the need for fairness and objectivity in trials, especially in sexual assault cases, to prevent wrongful convictions and charges.

• What is the court of appeal's ruling on the cross-examination of the accused?

  —The court of appeal found that the cross-examination of the accused by the Crown was highly improper and included interruptions and errors of fact.

• What is the speaker's opinion on the treatment of witnesses in court?

  —The speaker emphasizes that cross-examiners should be assertive and intelligent, but not obnoxious or aggressive, and should always treat witnesses with respect.

• What is the importance of excluding irrelevant evidence in trials?

  —Excluding irrelevant evidence is crucial to ensure fair trials and to prevent wrongful convictions, especially in sexual assault cases. 

Key Insights

• 🚫 The crown's cross-examination of the accused was highly improper and replete with interruptions, putting the accused on the spot in a way that is not allowed.
• 🤯 It's mind-boggling that the onus is still put on the accused to explain to the police in sexual assault cases, despite the general knowledge that an accused has the right to remain silent.
• 🤯 The potential for judges to make errors in law and the impact it can have on the accused is a terrifying reality in the justice system.
• 😠 Crown Council's approach was calculated to demean and humiliate the accused during cross-examination.
• 🚫 Crown counsel repeatedly called the accused a liar, painting him as a callous accuser ready to change charge, which significantly undermined the appearance of fairness in the trial.
• 🤔 Attorneys sometimes prosecute regardless of the evidence, leading to wrongful convictions, especially in sexual assault cases.
• 🤔 The justice system needs to ensure that we don't have wrongful convictions or wrongful charges and have an objective view of what we're doing.
• 🤔 "I'm going to suggest to you you developed an attraction to the complainant no sir and I'm going to suggest you pursued a sexual relationship."

#Justice #JosephNeuberger #MichaelBury 

Clips 

• 00:00 🕰 Tudor has made great watches, including the first meta-certified Rolex, and the speaker discusses limitations on certain words and topics, including a famous court case involving a crown named Steve Allen.
  • Tudor has made some great watches, including the first one in the Rolex family to be meta-certified, and they are owned by the same company as Rolex.
  • The speaker discusses their love for watches and how they cope with stress by researching watches and building cars on their phone.
  • The podcast episode is about the topic "Hey Crown, You Can't Do That" and the speaker discusses the limitations on certain words and topics.
  • The speaker discusses a famous case involving a crown named Steve Allen and the limitations of what the crown can do in court.
• 04:13 🔍 The speaker questions biblical knowledge in relation to lying about selling guns, Mr. Allen feels bound by his oath but admits to not being well-versed, and the crown's irrelevant reference holds the accused up to ridicule in court.
  • The speaker questions someone's knowledge of the Ten Commandments and their relation to lying about selling guns.
  • Mr. Allen feels bound by his oath to God and the Bible, but admits to not being well-versed in its teachings.
  • The crown made an irrelevant reference to biblical knowledge in a court case, which had no other effect but to hold the accused up to ridicule in front of the jury.
• 07:21 🔍 Jury trials require careful behavior and speech, with a focus on the evolution of character evidence, improper cross-examination by the Crown, and the importance of the right to remain silent, especially in sexual assault cases.
  • Jury trials require careful behavior and speech.
  • The speaker discusses the evolution of character evidence in courtrooms, highlighting the shift from a wild west mentality to a more subtle approach.
  • The accused cannot be asked to comment on the truthfulness of the Crown's witness as it unfairly puts them on the spot and reverses the burden of proof.
  • The court of appeal found that the cross-examination of the accused by the Crown was highly improper and included interruptions and errors of fact.
  • The accused should not be obligated to explain or provide assistance to the police, and the right to remain silent is critical in the resolution of the case, especially in sexual assault cases.
  • The speaker discusses the problem of jurors and lawyers thinking that female complainants don't lie, and emphasizes that a lie is a lie, regardless of the explanation.
• 14:53 🔍 The Crown wrongly suggested the accused got a strategic benefit from reviewing disclosure before giving evidence, violating their rights.
  • Cross-examiners should be assertive and intelligent, but not obnoxious or aggressive, and should always treat witnesses with respect.
  • The Crown attempted to suggest to the accused that he got a strategic benefit in reviewing disclosure before giving his evidence, which is absolutely wrong.
  • The accused has the right to review disclosure and it is a palpable error in law to prevent them from doing so, as it is not a criticism of their evidence.
  • The court of appeals ruled that it is unfair for the Crown to refer to the accused receiving disclosure and not being cross-examined, as it violates their constitutional rights.
• 18:56 👑 The accused is entitled to disclosure and burden shifting is wrong, the crown's sarcastic and demeaning cross-examination can lead to injustice and wrongful conviction.
  • The accused is entitled to know the case against them and receive disclosure, and the burden shifting to the accused is wrong.
  • The system in Canada is better, but it is wrong to put the accused on the spot with late evidence, leading to injustice and wrongful conviction.
  • The crown in the court of appeal decision of R versus AJR crossed-examined the accused sarcastically, made personal comments, and attacked the accused's lifestyle, leading to a potential pause in the proceedings.
  • The speaker discusses the court of appeals and blood pressure medication.
  • Crown Council adopted a sarcastic and demeaning tone during cross-examination, which is prohibited by the court.
  • Crown counsel engaged in improper and potentially prejudicial cross-examination of the accused, leading to a miscarriage of justice and undermining the appearance of fairness in the trial.
• 25:50 🔍 Attorneys should carefully consider evidence before pursuing wrongful convictions, especially in sexual assault cases, and there is a need to be vigilant in excluding irrelevant evidence to ensure fair trials.
  • Attorneys should not prosecute based on unsupported allegations and should carefully consider evidence before pursuing wrongful convictions, especially in sexual assault cases.
  • There is a need to be vigilant and preemptively cut off impermissible evidence in trials, as there is a balance between real and unreal cases, and caution is needed regarding what constitutes permissible evidence.
  • The speaker discusses the importance of excluding irrelevant evidence in order to ensure fair trials and expresses frustration with the Crown attempting to introduce impermissible evidence.
  • The Minister of Justice focuses on presenting evidence within the rules, remaining neutral on the guilt or innocence of the accused.
• 31:19 👑 The importance of fair presentation of evidence and cross-examination in legal cases, particularly in sexual assault, domestic assault, and homicide trials, to avoid wrongful convictions and the need for a more thoughtful and fair process in the justice system.
  • People were talking without arguing or fighting, which was refreshing to see, especially from a young Crown.
  • The importance of ensuring fair presentation of evidence and the ability to cross-examine in legal cases, particularly in sexual assault, domestic assault, and homicide trials, without being hindered by popular opinion.
  • The justice system needs to ensure fairness and objectivity in handling cases to avoid wrongful convictions or charges, and there is a need for a more thoughtful and fair process in the system.
  • The crown engaged in improper cross-examination of the appellant by suggesting that he found the complainant attractive, which is irrelevant and unfair.
  • Stereotypical assumptions about sexual assault are irrelevant and rooted in impermissible reasoning, and it is important to understand that sexual assault is a crime of violence, not passion.
  • The speaker questions the necessity of certain questions and offers to read the cross-examination.
• 38:33 📺 The accused denies pursuing a sexual relationship with the complainant, and the speaker discusses false myths and stereotypes about male sexual aggression that still exist today.
  • The speaker suggests that the accused was attracted to the complainant and pursued a sexual relationship, but the accused denies it.
  • The main premise is that there are false myths and stereotypes about male sexual aggression that still exist today, despite court rulings against them.
  • Please send us your questions and don't forget to like, comment, subscribe, and share, and follow us on Twitter and Telegram.

------------------------------------- 0:42:32 SourceUrl: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5HJq3lK5qE 2024-02-15T12:10:01Z