R V. ZWEZDARYK – [2004] O.J. NO. 6137 (SCJ)

Para 22: “It is, in my view, conjectural at best to assume that the jury will be influenced by the fact that the accused is in the prisoner’s box [cite omitted].

Para 24: “I do not see any prejudice to any accused occasioned by all three being in the prisoner’s box. I am not convinced that there is any significant impediment to communication between counsel and the client engendered by the fact that the accused is in the box as opposed to seated at counsel table. This is not the case where there is any special reason for which the accused Mr. Voong or Mr. Marini must be seated at counsel table [citation omitted]”.

Para 28: “In the result, the accuse Mr. Zwezdaryk will sit in the prisoner’s box throughout the entirety of the trial, both before the jury and in its absence. He will be entitled, however, to have his restraints removed while the trial is in progress. For greater certainty, the custodial staff will be entitled to bring him into the court room using such restraint mechanisms as they see fit to employ provided that such mechanisms are removed prior to the commencement of proceedings. Equally, they are entitled to apply the mechanisms within the confines of the courtroom at the conclusion the proceedings for the purposes of transporting him back to the cells”.

Para 29: “The accused Mr. Marini and Mr. Voong will sit in the prisoner’s box during the portion of the trial that takes place before the jury. I have already ruled, on consent, that they may remain at counsel table during all pretrial proceedings. They will not be routinely searched upon either entering or leaving the prisoner’s box. Rather, any security concerns may be met by searching Mr. Zwezdaryk upon his leaving he prisoner’s box.”