The accused, charged with first degree murder involving the alleged use of a long gun, sought permission to challenge prospective jurors for cause based on potential bias relating to long gun ownership and gun control attitudes.
The defence proposed a series of voir dire questions aimed at uncovering juror views on long gun laws, gun regulation, and firearm ownership.
In support of the application, the defence called a retired police officer who conducted informal polling and internet research regarding public attitudes toward firearms.
The court held that the evidence failed to establish a widespread community bias regarding long gun ownership capable of creating a realistic potential for juror partiality.
Finding the polling evidence unreliable and insufficient under the test articulated in governing jurisprudence, the application to permit the proposed challenge for cause was dismissed.
