For BB: Alberta Prosecutorial Tizzy

[Malthus]

Check this out:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/critics-internal-memo-reveals-shocking-bias-of-top-justice-officials-1.2865375

What think you of all this?

[MadImmortalMan]

Moreau said the irony of the memo is that it reinforces the misconception that creates anger toward Crown prosecutors.

"Their role is sometimes misunderstood and everyday people, who don't have a legal education, could easily believe that the role of the Crown is to seek a conviction and try and put them in jail.

"And people can become very angry with Crown prosecutors, just simply for doing their job," he said.

See? Nothing to worry about. It's just that the little people aren't educated enough.

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[MadImmortalMan]

It was in a memo about a dispute about whether or not our salaries should be disclosed.

They should not, IMO. You dudes have a hard enough job as it is without every yahoo in the lockup looking up your personal info on the sunshine list.

[Malthus]

A whole lot of nothing.

Discussing the role of a Crown is tricky, because yes, they're right - the SCC has repeatedly told us that our job is not to get convictions, but merely to see that justice is done.  But in seeing that justice is done we are frequently asking courts to convict people.  It's easy to slip up and, incorrectly, say that our job is to get convictions.

This would be worrisome if it was part of a memo about a decision whether or not to prosecute.  But it isn't.  It was in a memo about a dispute about whether or not our salaries should be disclosed.

So, I take it you will not be writing angry letters calling for resignations like the dude mentioned in that article? 

[crazy canuck]

Meh, That memo could also be read as, once crown counsel decides that the case against the accused is strong then the role of crown counsel is to obtain a conviction.  Nothing really objectionable about that.

[Barrister]

[deleted

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[Malthus]

Since those people are both my boss's bobb's boss, no I think it would be unwise of me to call for their resignations.   

Well, if you do - bobb's your uncle. 

[crazy canuck]

Meh, That memo could also be read as, once crown counsel decides that the case against the accused is strong then the role of crown counsel is to obtain a conviction.  Nothing really objectionable about that.

No, it isn't.  We have to continually re-assess whether we should continue our prosecution.  Heck, I've killed matters mid way through trial when we no longer had a resonable prospect of conviction.

One assumes that if you change you mind you will do something about it.  But while you are of the view that the case is strong you do have a responsibility to obtain a conviction.

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[crazy canuck]

Tell me, what is the difference between "Counsel have a duty to see that all available legal proof of the facts is presented: it should be done firmly and pressed to its legitimate strength but it must also be done fairly."  and once you are convinced the case is strong, unless you come to a different conclusion during the course of the trial, you have a duty to try to obtain a conviction?

All the SCC is saying is that your duty is not to obtain a conviction independent of other factors.  Which is exactly the point I was making 

[Barrister]

[deleted]

[crazy canuck]

It cannot be over-emphasized that the purpose of a criminal prosecution is not to obtain a conviction

You can be a bit daft at times counsel.

I did not say The purpose of a criminal prosecution is to obtain a conviction. But I am beginning to understand why the SCC feels the need to make things simple for you guys. 

[Barrister]

[deleted]