London Ontario - Tori Stafford murder trial begins jury selection

[daisy.faithfull]

That's correct, Daisy. They would have received all of the evidence during disclosure. That disclosure would have included everything, no matter how small or whether it will be used during the trial. For example, every interview conducted whether it amounted to anything usable or not. Because there was no preliminary trial, the Defence doesn't know how, or what pieces, of the evidence will be presented at trial in order to prepare for cross-examination.

Regarding the defence not knowing what specific pieces of evidence will be used and perhaps even how it is used, is the crown only allowed then to present the exact case that they present at the pre-liminary trial?

I only ask because based on the site that was provided by Dilbert, it looks like the primary purpose of the pre-liminary hearing is more about making sure that there is enough evidence (as opposed to the specific pieces that will be used) and being able to determine if the witnesses are changing their story.

 

[dilbert]

Regarding the defence not knowing what specific pieces of evidence will be used and perhaps even how it is used, is the crown only allowed then to present the exact case that they present at the pre-liminary trial?

I only ask because based on the site that was provided by Dilbert, it looks like the primary purpose of the pre-liminary hearing is more about making sure that there is enough evidence (as opposed to the specific pieces that will be used) and being able to determine if the witnesses are changing their story.

I know you aren't quoting me, but I believe a preliminary inquiry is similar to what happens during a Grand Jury in the States.

Hopefully nobodyzgirl will see this and clear up any remaining confusion.

 

[nonfictionrocks]

Regarding the defence not knowing what specific pieces of evidence will be used and perhaps even how it is used, is the crown only allowed then to present the exact case that they present at the pre-liminary trial?

I only ask because based on the site that was provided by Dilbert, it looks like the primary purpose of the pre-liminary hearing is more about making sure that there is enough evidence (as opposed to the specific pieces that will be used) and being able to determine if the witnesses are changing their story.

BBM

That IS pretty interesting.

 

[matou]

I'm very interested in who will be called on for the defense as witnesses.

 

[Wondergirl]

I could not sit through a day in court during this trial.

I wonder when the field trip for the jury members will take place, the area is getting alot of snow this weekend.

Does anyone know if the accused also travels to Victoria's recovery location, is it just the jurors, or who goes exactly?

 

[maxfactor]

Does anyone know if the accused also travels to Victoria's recovery location, is it just the jurors, or who goes exactly?

I sure hope not!!! But in a way it would serve him right. IMO

 

[maxfactor]

I'm very interested in who will be called on for the defense as witnesses.

I've wondered about that too. I suppose if he has an alibi they would call witnesses who could corroborate that. I suppose friends who could testify to his demeanor around that time, maybe his girlfriend. I guess they will probably have some forensic experts to try to refute some of the evidence as well.IMO

 

[nonfictionrocks]

Does anyone know if the accused also travels to Victoria's recovery location, is it just the jurors, or who goes exactly?

I would think that they would all go, including Rafferty and his team but that is a very good question.

 

[dilbert]

I sure hope not!!! But in a way it would serve him right. IMO

Why would it serve him right? If he's innocent, then it's just cruel, if he's guilty, he'd likely enjoy visiting again.

MOO

 

[matou]

Why would it serve him right? If he's innocent, that is just cruel, if he's guilty, he'd likely enjoy visiting again.

MOO

If he's innocent, why is it cruel? Cruel is what happened to Tori. The jury will watch how he acts while there and where he looks, etc. They will be able to read his reaction if he is also going on the visit to the murder site. JMO

 

[maxfactor]

Why would it serve him right? If he's innocent, then it's just cruel, if he's guilty, he'd likely enjoy visiting again.

MOO

I guess I was thinking that he might actually feel some remorse if he had to revisit the site. It hadn't occurred to me that he might enjoy it.

 

[matou]

I guess I was thinking that he might actually feel some remorse if he had to revisit the site. It hadn't occurred to me that he might enjoy it.

It hadn't occurred to me either. Kind of like how Russell Williams enjoyed looking at his photos in the lingerie in court. Sick.

 

[maxfactor]

Under the circumstances I really doubt Rafferty will go with the jury to the site. They would need a huge number of officers to keep him safe.

 

[Alethea Dice]

Does anyone know if the accused also travels to Victoria's recovery location, is it just the jurors, or who goes exactly?

Both accused and the judge traveled to the crime scene in the Jordan Manners trial. If the accused is accompanying them, I don't think it would be highly publicized for security reasons.

JMO

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Canada/20100212/manners_trial_100212/

 

[dilbert]

If he's innocent, why is it cruel? Cruel is what happened to Tori. The jury will watch how he acts while there and where he looks, etc. They will be able to read his reaction if he is also going on the visit to the murder site. JMO

Yes, what happened to Tori was cruel, horrible, terrifying, etc, no one is refuting that, we all know it and acknowledge it.

It would be cruel because he hasn't been found guilty yet thus further casting MR in a bad light. IMO, this is a move by the Crown to stir up emotions of hate, anger, and guilt amongst the jurors towards the accused. I don't think there is any evidentiary value in visiting the site and find it cruel, if not prejudicial.
If the Crown is wanting to show how remote the area is, it could easily be done in the courtroom via google earth.

MOO

 

[daisy.faithfull]

The defence receives full disclosure of evidence, but like Alethea said, it's everything, whether it's relevant or whether the Crown uses it at trial or not. That is a lot of information to go through and process. What Derstine was referring to in Matou's post, (Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - London Ontario - Tori Stafford murder trial begins jury selection) is that he doesn't know HOW the Crown will present it's case, meaning, he doesn't know what evidence/information he will present from the disclosure received. Also, because the defence's motion for a preliminary inquiry was denied, the defence does not get a chance to "test" the Crown's witnesses and see how that evidence "stands up" to cross examination. Therefore the defence is at a disadvantage going in to trial because he is not prepared fully on how the Crown will proceed.

Hope this makes sense, HTH

I know you aren't quoting me, but I believe a preliminary inquiry is similar to what happens during a Grand Jury in the States.

Hopefully nobodyzgirl will see this and clear up any remaining confusion.

Yes, it is helping, because I'm learning. I wasn't quoting you but I was using that link.

I was thinking the same thing about it being like a grand jury. The same only different.

ETA: Regarding Nobodyzgirl coming in to clear things up if needed, that would be awesome. This is interesting, it always seems like things that "are the same only different" often are.

 

[Alethea Dice]

I don't understand what the visit is going to achieve either. The Defense didn't object, so maybe they don't think it will affect them too negatively. I guess we'll find out when it happens (hopefully).

 

[daisy.faithfull]

BBM

That is exactly how I see it, you know me, part of the public speaking here. The crown only wants her confession read into record not anything she might have said at a preliminary hearing because her confession could start to be broken down. And inbetween the preliminary trail and the trial, the defense would have time and opportunity to seek out information that could very well refute her testimony. This way they only have one chance at her. If Rafferty is found guilty, could this not be a foundation in which he might build an appeal?]

Mark my words, she will be out early under the faint hope clause if she does a good job in the next several weeks.

That is my biggest concern as well.

I understand why the pre-liminary trial can be skipped but making sure that you convict the right person and that that person's conviction sticks is soooooooo important not only so that there is justice but also to protect the public.

I was looking back at this link provided by kmclaner about circumstances that warrant a direct indictment. One of which was:

where proceedings against the accused ought to be expedited to ensure public confidence in the administration of justice – for example, where the determination of the accused’s innocence or guilt is of particular public importance;

In general, when I think of the public's interest in a speedy conclusion I think of tax dollars. YKWIM? As a member of the public, especially when it comes as disturbing as this one, I would rather they do it right the first time, if it takes a bit longer so be it.

 

[antiquegirl]

Yes, what happened to Tori was cruel, horrible, terrifying, etc, no one is refuting that, we all know it and acknowledge it.

It would be cruel because he hasn't been found guilty yet thus further casting MR in a bad light. IMO, this is a move by the Crown to stir up emotions of hate, anger, and guilt amongst the jurors towards the accused. I don't think there is any evidentiary value in visiting the site and find it cruel, if not prejudicial.
If the Crown is wanting to show how remote the area is, it could easily be done in the courtroom via google earth.

MOO

Honestly? I do not think that the accused will be visiting the crime scene. My guess is that it will be the members of the jury, the judge, the Crown, the defence attorney(s), possibly some LE, and of course, the media will be there. I'll be very surprised if the accused goes.

JMHO

 

[maxfactor]

WOODSTOCK - The first-degree murder trial of Michael Rafferty, the man accused of abducting and killing eight-year-old Victoria "Tori" Stafford, begins Monday with the opening statements. The trial is expected to last up to three months.

http://www.woodstocksentinelreview.com/2012/03/04/the-rafferty-trial