Today’s presentation will be a virtual meeting.

Join Zoom Meeting https://us06web.zoom.us/j/971381033

“Is Our Justice System Really Broken?”
Presented by Catherine Francis

Following the death of O.J. Simpson on April 10, 2024, a discussion arose as to whether his acquittal for murder was the result of the U.S. justice system being broken. There were differences of opinion. This led to the proposal for a HAT topic on whether the justice system is really broken - focused in particular on Canada but also touching on the U.S. and elsewhere. What do people mean when they suggest that the justice system is broken and what can we do to fix it?

A few very recent examples can help to focus the discussion.

On April 18, 2024, one of our members received a change.org petition calling on the Government of Canada to amend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to remove the constitutional right of “any person charged with an offense has the right to be tried within a reasonable time.” The rationale for the petition is that "dangerous criminals are allowed to go free due to perilous court delays".

Apart from the lack of understanding of the constitution (it cannot be unilaterally changed by the Government of Canada), the petition calls for the wrong solution. The solution is not to take away constitutional rights, but to change the system and appoint more judges to ensure that cases are tried within a reasonable time.

Second example. On April 20, 2024, a Canadian Press story reported the death of a New Brunswick man just three months after he was exonerated for a murder that he did not commit. He was exonerated after having spent 21 years in prison. This, and other wrongful convictions, is an example of the failure of the justice system. As a society, we (in Canada and many other jurisdictions) take the view that it is better for 10 guilty people to go free than for one innocent person to be wrongfully convicted.

Third example. Speaking of potential wrongful convictions, on April 21, 2024, it was announced that, after three days of deliberation, a jury had found Umar Zameer not guilty of murder (and all other charges) in connection with the July 2, 2021 death of a Toronto police officer.

Mr. Zameer, a 34 year old accountant, was charged with murder after he ran over a police officer in an underground parking garage.

At the time of the events, the then-interim police Chief James Ramer apparently told the media, “We believe this was an intentional, deliberate act.”

Despite this, Mr. Zameer was granted bail. Our premier, Doug Ford, said at the time that this ruling was “beyond comprehension”. Our then-Mayor John Tory said it was “almost impossible to imagine” why Mr. Zameer would be released.

Following Mr. Zameer's acquittal, we learned that the judge who granted him bail, and who now sits on the Ontario Court of Appeal, wrote a 53-page bail decision slamming the murder charges:

“The Crown’s theory — that Mr. Zameer, who the evidence supports was out for a normal family evening with his pregnant wife and young son, who has no criminal record, who has a good work and education history, suddenly decided to intentionally kill or cause bodily harm that he knew was likely to cause death to a police officer — runs contrary to logic and common sense.”

The reasons for the bail decision were kept under wraps by a publication ban until Mr. Zameer's acquittal.

The truth emerged at trial. The police officers were in plain clothes. They were investigating an incident unrelated to Mr. Zameer and approached his vehicle. He thought he was being attacked by criminals and acted to protect his pregnant wife and small child from danger. During the trial, in the absence of the jury, the trial judge apparently also repeatedly attacked the Crown’s case for murder and predicted the jury would reject it.

This case, in my view, is a failure of the justice system. Not because Mr. Zameer was acquitted but because he was charged in the first place.  Why was he targeted by the police?  Was there underlying racism?  Why was he charged with first degree murder?  Why did the Crown continue to pursue first degree murder in the face of such a strong rebuke from the judge who presided over his bail hearing?   He went through almost three years of legal agony, had his reputation and livelihood tarnished if not destroyed and faced a potential life sentence.  

And yet people are circulating petitions saying the likes of Mr. Zameer should be stripped of their right to a trial within a reasonable period of time.  Our own premier is trying to stack the criminal courts with “tough on crime” judges who will lock up criminals for longer.  The public lust for “justice” wants a system where the “bad guys” have few constitutional rights and our prisons are packed.  

These are the failures we should be discussing.  

As usual, I have asked Chat GPT for a few questions to get an unbiased perspective.  As usual, the questions are pretty good.    

1. How does socioeconomic status affect access to justice?

2. What role does racial bias play in the criminal justice system?

3. How effective are rehabilitation programs in reducing recidivism rates?

4. What reforms could improve the fairness and efficiency of the legal process?

5. How do emerging technologies impact law enforcement and legal proceedings?

6. What are the ethical considerations surrounding plea bargaining?

7. How does the media influence public perceptions of the justice system?

8. What are the implications of mandatory minimum sentences?

9. How can the justice system better support victims of crime?

10. What strategies are effective in preventing wrongful convictions?

Join us for a very interesting discussion, won’t you?