Crowns role to be fair, not necessarily to win
http://www.edelsonlaw.ca/news/show/46/8/0000/0
Our Courts have repeatedly said that the ideal prosecutor is a “minister of justice” who discharges his or her duty to the court in a fair and objective manner. It is the Crown’s duty, therefore, not to secure a conviction at all costs, but to ensure that the evidence supporting the prosecution is put fairly before the court. For this reason, it is often said that the Crown never wins or loses. Moreover, prosecutors are not permitted to express their personal opinions about the guilt or innocence of the accused or to engage in inflammatory rhetoric in the court proceedings. They must carry out their role with solemnity, dignity and professionalism. Similarly, the Crown ought not to act as an advocate for the victim or the victim’s family. The criminal justice system is not a three-party proceeding and, in general, complainants or their relations have no standing in the criminal process. |
Quote:
The evidence won/lost the case. |
Don't like that he can't protect himself and family against vigilantism now...
|
Quote:
Quote:
The evidence won the Stanley case, but the prosecutor granted immunity to armed thieves and gained nothing by doing so. |
Quote:
|
Even if the prosecution never granted immunity to the little thugs, the penalty if found guilty would of been laughable. We all know that they weren’t gonna do 5 years in prison..... a slap on the wrist at most. So really...does it matter if they were granted immunity? Not really.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Hate to break it to you but criminals have no reason to stop right now. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Fellas, this one has been fully discussed and run its course. Too many deleted posts, suspensions, and overall drama.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:52 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.