A4

By Laura MacInnis

Stumble Upon

del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Print

Email

Speak Up

Ten years ago there was a riot at the Atlantic Institution in Renous.

Enlarge Photo

Minister of Justice and Consumer Affairs, T.J. Burke sits in a courtroom in Fredericton to video conference with other courtrooms across the province as part of a demonstration of the video-link systems now operating in every court in the province.

Instead of hauling 13 violent inmates to the Miramichi Law Courts to be charged, a video conference was set up at the local hospital between the judge and the prison.

The security it maintained for sheriffs who would otherwise have to transport more than a dozen criminals from a maximum security prison was a benefit the court saw right away.

That's why Miramichi was the first to purchase it's own Integrated Switch Digital Networking (ISDN) video link system in New Brunswick in 2001.

A decade later, the rest of the province has come around and has found even more benefits for the technology.

The provincial government announced this week all 14 courtrooms in the province have now installed video conferencing equipment and came online July 1.

To date Miramichi has used the system 383 times — and not just for inmates.

Minister of Justice and Consumer Affairs, T.J. Burke sat in a courtroom in Fredericton and teleconferenced with several courtrooms in other parts of the province as part of a demonstration.

Speaking with court staff as well as reporters set up at each location, Burke noted some of the reasons for bringing ISDN to all the courts in the province..

"This is a cost-savings solution for the taxpayers," Burke said.

"Courtrooms and judges can't tolerate the backlogs we have at this time."

For Burke, the day was an educational one, asking Miramichi staff what benefits they have seen in the decade they've been using it.

This reporter sat in the judge's chair, while others present in the two rooms sat in the witness box and table for the prosecution testing the visual and audio quality being relayed on the 52-inch flat screen televisions.

Court sheriff in Miramichi Moe Morrison is one of the most well-acquainted with the technology. He told the minister how it has changed his job.

"It takes two sheriffs three hours to move prisoners back and forth from Renous and back. On top of that it is the type of people you are dealing with. It's a matter of time and security."

Now all prisons in the province are equipped with the system, too.

With legal aide the process can be slow, said Mary Ellen McGrath, court reporter in Miramichi who has dealt with many of the 383 video appearances.

"We may see an inmate eight times before they are approved for a lawyer. That would have been eight trips."

Prisoners involved with excessively violent crimes in Renous will not be left at the maximum security prison anyway. They are shipped to the Special Handling Unit in Quebec. But it is still the Miramichi courts who deal with them.

"Imagine the cost to send an inmate from SHU," said Morrison.

Using the equipment for safety and saving time transporting inmates is not the only use.

Time and expenses for travel can also be saved for litigants and lawyers. And closed circuit televisions can allow vulnerable witnesses, such as sexual assault victims, to testify without being in the presence of the accused.

Burke toted the ability for courts to now have witness testimony from people "across the country."

But Miramichi has gone even farther.

In 2006 a witness who was supposed to testify in his cousin's trial was sent to Khandahar, Afghanistan, where he was serving with the military forces.

Instead of shipping him back for the trial, the judge agreed to accept his testimony by video link.

"Using the system for the young man in Khandahar only cost $200 comparatively," said Morrison.

Still, questions of how far the courts can or will take the technology may come into play from time to time.

Assessing credibility of a witness can be at stake for a judge watching a video testimony. But Burke says that decision is left to the judge himself.

"Even with an individual before a judge the judge still has to make those those decisions about credibility," said Burke. "So we leave those decisions about when to allow video statements to the judge rather than the government dabbling in that.The judge is the ultimate decision maker."

Cripps said it is always a judicial matter whether it is appropriate to use the equipment on a case per case basis.

"It is less administerial than you'd think, it's not a given," said Cripps.

But there are limits to how far the system can go and how far the government will allow it to go.

In the United States several judges have used the video conferencing equipment to try a person on the other side of the country. It is a controversial decision to have witnesses and lawyers and judge present to try a person who isn't in the room, but the minister said he doesn't see the technology ever being used that way in Canada.

Cripps said while inmates can make appearances by video, it only goes so far as making their pleas.

"The accused has a right to be present in the courtroom during trial. He can lose that right to be present — that has happened here. In that case we may put them in the cell behind the prisoner box and have a closed circuit television for them," he said. "They are still here. We would not video conference a trial just because they are over in Renous — not to save money."