Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

R V Williams 1998

No description
by

Kadeem Toney

on 17 October 2013

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of R V Williams 1998

R V Williams [1998]
R V Williams 1998 "Facts"
Victor Daniel Williams was an Aboriginal who pleaded not guilty in robbing a Victoria Pizza Parlour. Williams claimed that someone else committed the robbery.
The Why?
Impartiality
- An inclination to weigh both views or opinions equally.
Issue
Did Williams have the right to challenge potential jurors for cause to determine whether prejudice against Aboriginals might impair their impartiality?
Decision
Williams's appeal was allowed, and a new trial was ordered. The Supreme Court held that the trial judge should have allowed the challenge for cause because it would have created a fair trial.
The reason for choosing this case was to explain how racial biases can alter the situation in a court room dramatically, depending on the jurors.
Williams challenged that potential jurors for the racial bias under s. 638 of the criminal code. Which states a prosecutor is entitled to any number of challenges of that ground.
The trial judge found that the evidence supported the view “that natives historically have been and continued to be the object of bias and prejudice.”
The trial judge rejected the argument against that such bias was even enough to support “challenge for cause,” because there was no reasonable possibility that it would lead to partiality in the trial. Williams noticed that there was a possibility that the potential juror would be biased against an Aboriginal robbing a white person. Williams was convicted of robbery and was unsuccessful in his Appeal to the British Columbia Court of Appeal.
Significance of R v. Williams Case
The significance of the R v. Williams case is that Williams should have got to "challenge for cause" against the jurors. The defence and the crown both have the statutory rights to challenge potential jurors. This challenge also creates an impartial juror, giving the crown and the defence and equal opportunity to participate in its selection. It may also be an anti discrimination right under s.15 of the Charter.
- unfair bias in favour of one person or thing; favouritism
Partiality
Sources:
Alexandrowicz, G. W. Dimensions of Law: Canadian and International Law in the 21st Century. Toronto: Emond Montgomery Publications, 2004. Print.
Full transcript