INTRODUCTION AND BRIEF DESCRIPTION
This section allows the judge to permit the jury to separate before deliberating on the verdict.
SECTION WORDING
647(1) The judge may, at any time before the jury retires to consider its verdict, permit the members of the jury to separate.
EXPLANATION
Section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada pertains to the ability of a judge to allow members of a jury to separate before they retire to deliberate and come to a verdict. This section of the code exists to provide flexibility and discretion to judges, who may determine that it is appropriate for jurors to separate in order to attend to personal or family matters, take care of urgent business, or other similar situations. However, it is important to note that the judge must exercise this discretion carefully, taking into account the specific circumstances of the case and the potential impact on the integrity of the case. For example, in cases where there is a risk of outside influences or improper communication with outside parties, a judge may decide to not permit the separation of jurors. Furthermore, it is important that jurors are reminded of their obligation to not discuss the case with others and to avoid exposure to outside information that could influence their decision. Overall, this section of the Criminal Code of Canada balances the need for jurors to have some flexibility in their personal lives while also maintaining the integrity and fairness of the legal process. It is ultimately up to the judge to make a decision about whether or not to permit jurors to separate and, if so, under what conditions.
COMMENTARY
Section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada provides the judge with the authority to allow the members of a jury to separate at any time before they retire to consider their verdict. This means that a jury can potentially break up and go their separate ways, rather than being kept in seclusion until they reach a final decision. The provision was inserted into the Criminal Code in recognition of the need for flexibility in certain circumstances. For example, in long and complex trials that may take weeks or even months, the jurors may become mentally and emotionally exhausted. Allowing them to separate and return to their daily lives may help improve their capacity to render a fair and just verdict. In addition, the section recognizes the realities of modern life, where jurors may have personal obligations that they cannot forgo, such as caring for a sick child or an elderly parent. The ability to separate also allows jurors to return home and tend to such responsibilities while still participating in the trial. However, the section also recognizes the potential for abuse and fraud. The jury is an essential component of the criminal justice system, and the integrity of their deliberations must be protected. Allowing jurors to separate creates the potential for external influences on their decision-making, either intentionally or unintentionally, that could prejudice their verdict and undermine the court's authority and legitimacy. To mitigate these risks, the judge must provide clear and explicit instructions to the jurors about their obligations and responsibilities during the separation. They may not discuss the case with anyone, including other jurors or family members, or conduct any independent research, such as searching the internet for information on the case or the accused. The judge may also impose conditions on their separation, such as requiring them to check in with the court daily, ensuring that they have not been exposed to any extraneous information or influence. Overall, section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada strikes a delicate balance between recognizing the need for flexibility and ensuring the integrity and impartiality of the jury system. By providing judges with discretion on whether and how to separate the jurors, it allows them to tailor their approach to the specific circumstances of each case, leading to the most just and fair outcomes.
STRATEGY
Section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada is a provision that allows judges to permit members of a jury to separate before they retire to consider their verdict. This provision offers several strategic considerations that can be employed to manipulate the outcome of a trial. These strategic considerations can be categorized into two broad categories: defense strategies and prosecution strategies. Defense Strategies In criminal trials, one of the strategies that defense attorneys employ is to attempt to create reasonable doubt in the minds of the jurors. Reasonable doubt refers to the lack of certainty in jurors concerning the guilt of the accused person. One of the ways defense attorneys can attempt to create reasonable doubt is by requesting the separation of the jury before they retire to consider their verdict. In this strategy, the defense aims to create an opportunity for jurors to become exposed to external influences that may undermine their confidence in the prosecution's case. By separating the jury, they can be exposed to information that is not presented in court, have a chance to discuss the case with individuals outside the trial, or engage with external media reports. This way, defense attorney hopes that the susceptibility of the jurors to such external influences could create enough doubt that they can avoid a guilty verdict. Another defense strategy is to request the separation of the jury and then employ outside help to influence the jurors. In this strategy, the defense team could employ outside experts to influence the jurors or leak false information to the jurors during their separation. By doing this, the defense team hopes to create confusion in the minds of the juror, making it challenging for them to arrive at a unanimous decision. Prosecution Strategies Prosecution attorneys can also employ various strategies when dealing with Section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada. One of the strategies is to convince judges not to permit the separation of the jury. In this strategy, the prosecution aims to limit the jurors' exposure to external information to protect their confidence in the prosecution's case. This way, the prosecutors hope to prevent the defense team from creating reasonable doubt in the minds of jurors, which could result in a mistrial or an innocent verdict. Another prosecution strategy is to monitor the jurors' activities during their separation. In this strategy, the prosecution detectives could tail the jurors to prevent any jury members from being exposed to external influences that could undermine their confidence in the prosecution's case. By monitoring jurors, the prosecution hopes to earn more confidence in the jurors, which could result in a guilty verdict. In conclusion, Section 647(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada offers several strategic considerations for both defense and prosecution attorneys. By understanding the strategic considerations of this provision, defense and prosecution attorneys can employ various tactics to influence the outcome of a case. However, the law must be upheld in its entirety, and it would be unethical and illegal to apply any of the above strategies, which could lead to a miscarriage of justice.