Lawyers Picking Their Battles

You may have read last week about one of the most bizarre courtroom dramas to play out in a Canadian court.

There’s a guy charged with second-degree murder.  His lawyer is attempting to get the presiding judge to excuse himself from the trial.  That, by itself, in not groundbreaking.  It’s the reason that has the courthouse buzzing.  You see, this lawyer is claiming that the judge is generally biased in favour of the Crown, to the point that his client cannot have a fair trial.  He was attempting to get permission to bring in 10 lawyer witnesses to attest to the judge’s general bias against the defence.

Think about that for a minute. 

Such a request cannot possibly succeed.  If the judge were to agree with defence counsel, that judge would NEVER be able to preside over a criminal trial in the future.   How could he, if he accepts that he is biased?  In fact, he couldn’t be a judge at all.  We can’t have judges on the bench who are limited in the cases over which they can preside. 

Knowing that such a request could never succeed, was the lawyer planning all along to go to the Court of Appeal?  If so, what are they going to do?  They are equally unlikely to ever make such an order, as it would finish that judge’s career. 

What is this lawyer’s goal in doing this? 

He’s not going to get the judge excused from this trial.  (At least he shouldn’t, in my opinion.)  He is spending a lot of time on this issue.  I sure hope Legal Aid isn’t funding this.  I have better uses for my tax dollars than that.

If someone thinks that a judge is systemically biased, they should bring a complaint to the Canadian Judicial Council. 

The lawyer is sure not endearing himself, or his client (who, after all instructs the lawyer) to the judge.  Is that the lawyer’s goal?  Make the judge so angry with him that he will be able to prove that, as a result of his bizarre motion, the judge was biased against his client?

Perhaps the lawyer is trying to get some fame for himself and improve his reputation so that he can charge more to future clients.  If that’s the case, I think he is being short-sighted.  Does he really want all the judges to recognize him and remember him for this stunt?  Is this good for his future clients?

This lawyer described the judge’s decisions as “train wrecks”.  Wow.  That’s harsh.  He has far more bravado than I do. 

Not surprisingly, the judge dismissed the motion.  It will be interesting to see what happens next.

I simply cannot figure out any possible sensible reason for taking such a course of action.  Of course, I am not a criminal lawyer and I have never been before that judge, but I am left shaking my head.