The appellant appealed his convictions for first degree murder and kidnapping, arguing that the Crown and police engaged in improper jury vetting.
The Crown had requested police to conduct extensive background checks on prospective jurors, including traffic violations and police contacts, and to provide comments on their suitability.
This information was used by the Crown in exercising peremptory challenges but was not disclosed to the defence.
The Court of Appeal found that the extent of the jury vetting, the violation of privacy legislation and Crown policy, and the failure to disclose the information disrupted the balance in the jury selection process.
This created an appearance of unfairness amounting to a miscarriage of justice.
The appeal was allowed and a new trial ordered.
