Court File and Parties
CITATION: R. v. Coveny, 2016 ONSC 3192
COURT FILE NO.: CR-15-70000089-0000
DATE: 20160407
ONTARIO SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
– and –
Joel Coveny
Defendant
COUNSEL:
Elizabeth Jackson, for the Crown
D. Sid Freeman, for the Defence
HEARD at Toronto: April 4, 2016
Ruling on Application for a View
Low J. (Orally)
[1] The defence seeks a view by the jury of certain areas at the Old City Hall Courthouse.
[2] The accused is charged with attempt to intimidate a justice participant and escape custody as a result of his running to a window in the Gladue Court at Old City Hall Courthouse and trying to leap out of it after his detention was ordered after a bail hearing.
[3] The defence position is that it is critical the jury members appreciate the physical layout of the building and the courtroom and the relation of certain facilities within the courthouse to each other. It is argued that the jury members will not be able to fully appreciate the above without visiting and viewing those parts of the building and courtroom.
[4] The main argument advanced in support of the application is that a video and photographs of the courtroom are not possible by reason of the prohibition in the Courts of Justice Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. C.43.
[5] The Crown has produced a number of scenes of crime photographs of the courtroom. The Crown has also produced a drawing showing the layout of the courtroom in which the location of the dais, prisoner’s box, windows and other features of the courtroom are shown.
[6] There is a prohibition against photography in the Courts of Justice Act at s. 136. It speaks, however, to court hearings and persons, and is not, in any case, an absolute prohibition, there being specified exemptions. There is no general prohibition against photography of the courthouse or of a courtroom.
[7] There is no prohibition against photography of the kind exemplified in the photographs that Crown has produced and which depict the scene of the alleged offence.
[8] In my view, the photographs, together with the drawing and any other demonstrative or viva voce evidence that may be adduced to amplify the foregoing will fully and adequately permit the members of the jury to understand the layout of the courtroom and the relationship of the courtroom to the exterior of the building.
[9] In my view, there will be no real and demonstrable advantage in taking a view. The application is therefore dismissed.
Low J.
Reasons for Ruling: April 7, 2016
Date of Released: May 13, 2016
CITATION: R. v. Coveny, 2016 ONSC 3192
COURT FILE NO.: CR-15-70000089-0000
DATE: 20160407
ONTARIO
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE
BETWEEN:
HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN
– and –
Joel Coveny
Defendant
RULING ON APPLICATION FOR A VIEW
Low J.
Reasons for Ruling: April 7, 2016
Date of Released: May 13, 2016