R. v. Dosanjh

R. v. Dosanjh

The court balanced the witness's need for accommodation and the accused's confrontation rights and concluded that allowing the witness to testify from outside the courtroom by videolink would risk impairing the accused's right to full answer and defence at this stage; a less intrusive accommodation (smaller courtroom, testimony from behind a screen so she cannot see the gallery or accused, ability to see counsel, and partial dimming of lights) will sufficiently facilitate full and candid evidence without undue prejudice, and therefore full videolink/out‑of‑court testimony was denied while behind‑screen and environmental accommodations were ordered.

Citation
2018 BCSC 1625
Parties
Crown: Regina; Accused: Surjit Singh Dosanjh
Court
Supreme Court of British Columbia
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
19 January 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal – Second Degree Murder; Application Under Criminal Code Ss.486.1(2) and 486.2(2) for Testimonial Accommodation / Trial – Mid‑trial Section 486.2 Application During Witness Evidence (after Direct Examination)
Outcome
Application partly granted and partly denied: videolink/outside courtroom testimony denied; witness to testify behind a screen in a smaller courtroom with lights partially dimmed; witness may see counsel but not the accused; accommodations to be revisited if inadequate.
Legal Topics
Testimonial Accommodation, Section 486.2 Criminal Code, Support Person, Testifying Outside Courtroom/video Link, Open Court Principle, Right to Full Answer and Defence
Source Language
English
Criminal Law Evidence Procedural Law Victim/witness Rights Testimonial Accommodation Section 486.2 Criminal Code Support Person Testifying Outside Courtroom/video Link +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Surjit Singh Dosanjh

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal – Second Degree Murder; Application Under Criminal Code Ss.486.1(2) and 486.2(2) for Testimonial Accommodation / Trial – Mid‑trial Section 486.2 Application During Witness Evidence (after Direct Examination)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether to order the witness to testify outside the courtroom/by videolink and permit a support person under s.486.2(2) and s.486.1(2)
  2. 2 How to balance the witness's need for accommodation against the accused's right to confrontation and to make full answer and defence
  3. 3 Whether s.486(1) alternatives (exclusion of public/behind a screen) were more appropriate given the witness's complaints about the physical courtroom environment

Ratio Decidendi

The court balanced the witness's need for accommodation and the accused's confrontation rights and concluded that allowing the witness to testify from outside the courtroom by videolink would risk impairing the accused's right to full answer and defence at this stage; a less intrusive accommodation (smaller courtroom, testimony from behind a screen so she cannot see the gallery or accused, ability to see counsel, and partial dimming of lights) will sufficiently facilitate full and candid evidence without undue prejudice, and therefore full videolink/out‑of‑court testimony was denied while behind‑screen and environmental accommodations were ordered.

Court Disposition

Application partly granted and partly denied: videolink/outside courtroom testimony denied; witness to testify behind a screen in a smaller courtroom with lights partially dimmed; witness may see counsel but not the accused; accommodations to be revisited if inadequate.

Orders

  • Witness to give the remainder of her evidence behind a screen so she will not see the accused
  • Move the testimony to a smaller courtroom to reduce gallery exposure