The hub of the Criminal Justice System is the courtroom.

This is the place where there is a culmination of the circumstances concerning committed offences come to a head. The results of this courtroom procedure is the most influential with regards to the offenders life and in some cases what follows this is almost anticlimactic. In this assignment I will be looking at the e tent that the general public is separated from !ustice e"en though !ustice is seen to be done in the best interest of the general public. The trial is a study in performance# from the players to the stage that it is set on. In $ouglas %ays article &'roperty (uthority and the Criminal )aw he speaks about the notions of !ustice ma!esty and mercy *. These three notions are as e"er present today as they were in the early *+th century. ,or this assignment I went to the -ld City %all in downtown Toronto. The building is e"ident from streets away due to its clock tower. This is already a testimony to the fact that it is a place of importance. .ecause of its structure and massi"e si/e one is left in awe of it. The fact that you ha"e to undergo a security check before entering is both uncomfortable as well as comforting. This is so because e"en though u ha"e to submit to this screening that is 0uite like an in"asion of pri"acy# you are at the same time aware that this is being done to keep you and e"eryone else safe. %owe"er one thing that was noted was the fact that court personnel was not checked as stringently# this did lead to the assumption that because they were in positions of power it is e pected that they would adhere to the rules of the court while the ordinary citi/en would not. The marble floors also add to the impressi"e nature of the courtroom. )ikewise the state of dress of the persons entering the building tell a tale. There were two distinct groups1 those dressed professionally# that is in suits# with briefcases2 and those dressed casually# that is in ordinary !eans# t3shirts. (t first look it seems that those in suits are the lawyers and !udges while those in casual clothing were the &e"eryday man including but not limited to the offenders. %owe"er this is not always the case as in one of the cases that was obser"ed the defendant was dressed in a suit# howe"er he came from an affluent family unlike the rest of the defendants and this would account for this. Therefore it can be said that the &dress di"ide could be made along class lines. The notion of ma!esty is more profoundly espoused in the layout of the courtroom. The fact that the !udge dressed in his formal wear and austere back gown with a sash is positioned on the highest dais in the centre of the room attests to his stature as the most important person in the room. (nd in front of him on an upraised platform are the clerks and court recorders# and in front of them# but backing the rest of the courtroom are the crown attorneys# both federal and pro"incial. (nd behind them are the defence attorneys who sit or stand !ust in front of the rails that separate the defendants# their support or family # and general obser"ers from the regular players of the courtroom. This rail is symbolic of the actual di"ide between the general public and the criminal !ustice system. This is so because the perception that there is of the courts in the criminal !ustice system is often "astly different to what actually happens in the court. This is where the idea of !ustice and mercy come into play. The public perception of the criminal !ustice system# for some# is one where the !udges ha"e far too much mercy of the de"iant offenders and thereby let them go free. 4hile for others because of what they see on tele"ision on crime dramas# the innocent party that is wrongly charged is sa"ed by the brilliant attorney at the last minute whereas the guilty person gets the ma imum penalty. %owe"er both these "iewpoints are incorrect. There is the illusion of mercy that is gi"en in some cases by the !udges when they choose to grant the defendant a more lenient sentence# usually the one recommended by the defence attorney. This was the case in one for one of the defendants# whose case was obser"ed. (lthough the crown attorney submitted a stricter punishment of 56 days in prison the defence lawyer stated that there should only be *5 days since the defendant had spent some time in pre3trial remand. (nd in a youth matter the !udge opted not to ha"e his $7( taken because he had only pled guilty to a simple assault as opposed to se ual assault therefore this would not ha"e been appropriate. )ikewise there were less aggra"ating factors than there were mitigating factors# and it seemed to point to the act of assault as a one time thing. -n the other hand in this same case the !udge made a few alterations to the Crowns submissions for a sentence that were harsher. Instead of imposing a ban on him being in the company of persons under thirteen unless accompanied by an adult 8a person of eighteen years9 as was submitted by the Crown he was ordered to be in the company of anyone under the age of fifteen without adult accompaniment. )ikewise he was sentenced to more hours of community ser"ice# howe"er this was mo"ed to his hometown. In all these cases the !udge fits in to the archetypes as laid down by %ay. %e is the arbiter of !ustice and the administer of mercy to those in need of it while occupying his position of prominence in the courtroom thereby gi"ing legitimacy to his edicts. %owe"er another theme running through the cases was the silencing of the defendants and the "ictims. In all but the case of the youth offender there was no

* %ay# $ouglas. 'roperty# (uthority# and the Criminal )aw page :+

mention of the "ictims of the crimes e cept when the information was being read# and when the order was being gi"en for the defendant to stay away from them. There was no credence paid to how they were affected by the crime# for the most part they were non3e istent. In essence the crimes were not longer acts against them but against the state. In this sense this is how the crime and case is appropriated by the professionals as 7ils Christie states. Christie looks at how conflicts become the property of legal professionals# with the defence attorney arguing on behalf of the defendant and the crown attorney on the behalf of society or the wronged party. (nd like the architecture the case law and statutes are so intimidating that the a"erage person is at a loss and often intimidated when confronted with this. The fact that "ictims were relegated to !ust a few mentions also speaks to this point. 8;riffiths9 (lthough this e clusion is there to a"oid the pursuit of "engeance and only allow for the propitiation of !ustice# this doesnt seem to be what actually happens. In all the cases that were obser"ed the charges that were gi"en were seen to be puniti"e &in proportion to the crimes. (lthough there were a few instances where rehabilitation programs were offered most of the sentences were prohibiti"e in nature e.g. not being allowed in a certain business establishment or general area# or community ser"ice. In my opinion this indicated a need for punishment and "engeance to a certain e tent. 7onetheless as it was stated by <ihorean and =ong# when youth offenders came before the court they were often placed into di"ersion programs# and granted conditional sentences. In most of the cases conditional sentences were granted# oftentimes including community ser"ice. It is unclear whether this was done because in most cases these were first time offences or if the court was actually interested in ha"ing the offenders wanted to ha"e the offenders remain in the community while ser"ing their sentences# and want to sa"e the court and system costs. ( more cynical "iew would be to say that these offenders were gi"en these sentences because they had in fact pleaded guilty to the charge and this could be seen as a mitigating factor. Since the offender has essentially taken responsibility for their actions and seems to be willing to accept any punishment to be meted out. (nd as stated before the !udge was willing to award !ail time credit. Contrary to the issues raised by .esty 'owell# granting credit for time spent in remand was not problematic for the !udge in 0uestion. %e was more than willing to acknowledge that the time that the defendant spent amounted to time ser"ed. The notion of proportionate sentencing was present. %owe"er had I not been aware of what remand or dead time was like I would ha"e "iewed this as particularly unfair since to my thinking it would ha"e seemed that the defendant was getting time off that he didnt deser"e. $a"id Tano"ich# speaks about the o"er3 representation of minorities in courtrooms. This was definitely the case in the courtrooms I obser"ed. (lthough there were some &white defendants# the ma!ority of defendants were either black or new immigrants. In a few cases there were 0uestions about the accessibility of >nglish language for these defendants. (nd of these defendants the ma!ority were young and only recently finished getting their high school diplomas. ,or the casual obser"er of the court cases it would seem that in fact the immigrant populations and the minorities of Canada were engaging in the most offences. (nd because these charges were often drug charges this would feed into the stereotype that these people are the gang bangers who introduce drugs to the youth of society. (nd like <r. ?obinson in the Jim ?ankin article many of these defendants had their prior history or dope sheet introduced by the crown as aggra"ating circumstances. In one of these cases the prior record introduced was his record as a minor. .eing that these records are e punged when the offender is eighteen these records were irrele"ant. %ad this been a !ury trial the fact that these were already read would ha"e created an image of the offender as a problem and threat to society e"en if the !udge were to tell the !ury to disregard the information# once it was said it cannot be &un3said . %owe"er in this case the !udge immediately chastised the crown attorney# and made sure the crown and court knew that it was unacceptable for him to bring this up. (lso the idea of recipe knowledge# was e"ident in the beha"iour and mannerisms of the attorneys and the !udge. This is especially seen when the charges are read by the law clerks. The charges are read as they are in contra"ention to the criminal code for e ample# @ is charged in contra"ention with section * part a of the cranial code. %owe"er if one does not understand# or know the criminal code then it is impossible to understand why the defendant is there until the information is read. )ikewise the charges that were read were "aried and many. (nd while the offenders only plead guilty to a few of the charges they were gi"en sentences for the few they plead guilty for. (lso one thing that was noted was that the offenders needed to be told when to stand up while his sentence was being read# or when they should speak. )ikewise# there seems to be a communications problem between the lawyers and defendants. It would seem that they ha"e no communication between them before the trial. (nd although the defendant is wai"ing his right to trial and stating to the court that he has not been coerced# he is not the one that says this. This is all said by the defence attorney and the defendant !ust agrees often times because he belie"es that the attorney

has his best interests in mind. The constant processesion of cases throughout the courtroom and the rapid speed at which the charges were read# and the sentences handed out was "ery reminiscent of a factory setting where the assembly line mo"es to finish the final product. In this case that final product is !ustice in the form of a sentence.