This study was designed to examine the legal process as it applies to alcohol-impaired driving from the point of view of Crown prosecutors and defence counsel, and to identify evidentiary or procedural factors which may impact the legal process, the rights of the accused, and interactions of all parts in the legal process. It was conducted by the Traffic Injury Research Foundation (TIRF) under funding from Transport Canada and the Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators (CCMTA) and was based on a previous survey of law enforcement in Canada (Jonah et al. 1997) that was also funded by Transport Canada. The purpose of this study was to survey a sample of Crown prosecutors and defence counsel to obtain contemporary information pertaining to the prosecution of impaired driving cases; more specifically, to identify problems that impede effective and efficient prosecution and to determine how these problems can be overcome. Accordingly, the survey was designed to gauge the attitudes, experiences, and perceptions of lawyers with regard to the legal system vis-à-vis alcohol-impaired driving in Canada. For various reasons, it was not possible to identify or access the entire population of lawyers who handle such cases, or even a truly representative sample. A total of 1,035 completed surveys were received, including 765 from Crown prosecutors and 270 from defence counsel. Responses were received from all jurisdictions, but the majority of Crown surveys were from Ontario, Quebec and British Columbia, Canada’s most populous provinces, and almost all of the defence surveys were received from Ontario, Quebec and Alberta. As response rates in some jurisdictions were low, generalizations must be made cautiously in some instances. Slightly more responses were received from men than women; the average age of respondents was early-40's. Three-quarters of Crown respondents and two-thirds of defence respondents were English-speaking. On average, defence counsel had more experience in the criminal law field at 16.5 years, compared to 12.5 years for Crown prosecutors. (Author/publisher)
Samenvatting