The Second Filed Trip - Provincial Supreme Court (25th Feb. 2008)

Impression of Provincial Supreme Court

The building is much larger than provincial supreme court, and the location is better (no beggars around). One side of building was made of glass, which offers an open-air view.

I saw Themis statuary - "Lady Justice" and felt pity that I could not take a picture of it. It was a angle who is carrying a roll of documents and a scales, and wearing a blindfold. I learnt from Law 12 that she measures the strengths of a case's support and opposition. The documents symbolizing the rule of law. A blindfold indicates that justice is (or should be) meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of the identity, power, or weakness: blind justice & blind equality. I could not keep my eyes away from this statuary because of those concepts, which are fresh, and new to me.

We visited Courtroom 50 and I was deeply impressed by this typical courtroom. It has paneling and chase wooden furniture, and the floor was covered with red carpet. The Royal coat of arm is not only on the wall behind of the bench, but also on the flags on both side of room. There are another three flags in the room: national flag, provincial flag, and the other- I guess- justice flag. The whole room is full of dignified atmosphere. Any people visit this room will respect the justice and law.

Mrs. Justice - Rowles

Mrs. Justice Rowles had a meeting with us. She is an experienced Judge and works for the law system for more than 20 years. Mrs. Justice Rowles looks queenly, but a little bit fatigue. She spoke sincerely and replied students’ questions thoughtfully. My question was that how she looked at “helping other to suicide”.  It sounded as a silly question to ask for Judge’s personal opinion towards the issue related with law, but that was the only question I could think of.

I was surprised and touched by Judy’s reply to the question from other student about the influence from her job to her life. It is the true answer from the bottom of her heart, I can tell. She felt the job was not exciting you have to loss many of your friends and interest chat with ordinary people. Yes, every thing has two sides, even the most respectful job is.

Before the end of meeting, Mrs. Justice Rowles let all the students walk up to the front of the courtroom and pass though the bench. From there I looked at the courtroom, I had majestic feeling towards the law.
Case No. One  - Criminal Trial
R. v. Pelletier
Rm. 54
Dangerous Driving Causing Death
30 Minutes

The accused was a truck driver. From the argument between the lawyers and Crown’s counsel, I knew the brief of this case. One day when the accused was driving a tow truck with logs and passing through a critical dangerous point, he did not speed down. Then his truck the logs rolled over and threw out of the truck, causing the death of a woman and her daughter. The accused admitted that he knew that a section of a highway was critical dangerous, however; he insisted that he did not speed up. There were several witnesses to give testimony. One driver at behind of the accused testified that the accused did not speed down. Another witness suggested that the logs were not placed in a logical way. If the heavy ones were at the bottom and the light ones on the top, the logs would not roll over and slid out of the tow truck.

But I could not figure out the 2nd witness was from the accused or Crown. It might be from the accused so that the guiltiness could be shared by more than one people; at least the one who placed the logs had some guiltiness as well.

The Judge was in a suit without red.

Case No. Two  - Criminal Jury Trial
R. v. Radacina & Dalen
Rm. 74
Judge: Mr.Justice Stewat
Case: Obstructing Justice
20 minutes

Two men are accused to obstruct justice by threaten a witness to change his testimony. The count of indictment is as follows: Mr. Dalen’s father was committed crime and now is in Jail. Mr. Dalen tried to help his father. He hired a person and offering him a sum of money and then out of Jail by hiring someone to visit the witness’ home with short gun. 

When I entering the courtroom, Crown was questioning the accused. The accused admitted that he said to the witness that he could change his story.  The reason was that the witness asked the accused how should he do to help the one in Jail (the father of the accused). The accused denied that he offered money and a gun to a man whom threatening the witness. The Crown seemed have had many evidences in her hand. She asked the accused one question following another. Only once Judge interrupted Crown’s question and pointed out it was not a good question - a leading question, I guess.

 Crown spoke in a way exactly as on the movie, which I like most. She gave gestures and she turned to the jury and sometime turned to the Judge. Her speech was full of energy. I had one query- there were two as “accused”, only one present in court. Where was another one?
The judge was in a suit with red. I was wondering why judges suits were different in supreme courts.

Case No. Three - Criminal
R. v. Kim
Rm. 75
Aggravated Assault
15 minutes

It was a case about aggravated assault. Tim was accused to attack a woman in the street. There were 12 people of jury, two people of Crown counsel, and two defendant lawyers. The judge was reading a document to the jury. That day was the last day of trial and the next day would be sentence hearing.

Judge asked Jury to give a verdict. Sheriff passed the verdict sheets to the jury, whom was required to make final decision. Judge mentioned that only one of the several witnesses testified that the accused was committed with a crime.

During the time that the judge was reading the documents, I saw a lawyer stood up and offered the accused some water. May be this scene was common in Canada, but I felt it showed respecting to the human right in Canada.