The accused, J.A., facing charges of first-degree murder and attempt murder, applied to be permitted to sit at counsel table during his jury trial instead of the prisoner's dock.
The application was based on concerns about potential unfair adverse inferences by the jury, the absence of security concerns, and the desire for more meaningful participation in the trial.
The court reviewed the principles governing a trial judge's discretion in seating the accused, noting that the customary position is the dock and that this does not inherently violate Charter rights unless it manifestly precludes the accused from making full answer and defence.
Expert testimony from a criminologist regarding mock trial studies suggesting juror prejudice was considered but ultimately dismissed due to methodological limitations and the inability to replicate a real trial's solemnity and dynamics.
The court emphasized the importance of trusting jurors to follow instructions on the presumption of innocence and the burden of proof.
The application was denied.
