So I have to go to court tomorrow

[MRN]

No sov-cit laughs expected, alas. No laughs of any sort, really: I'm a witness at a preliminary hearing for a murder trial.

I can even say for certain the defendant is not pro-se, as I've had doings with his lawyer (I sprung the defendant's dog from protective hold and rehomed him, which let me tell you what was nearly as complicated as if Dozer had been the suspect and had needed bail). I mean, unless he fired the lawyer later, but it seems unlikely.

What I have to tell is very little and I expect that ultimately I'm going to sit around catching up on my light reading at the courthouse for an unknown period, say my very short piece, and be done, but it's a heavy business and I feel pretty grim right now.

And so, my friends, I turn to you. Please give me advice about Going To Court (aside from "do not wear shorts". I hear that I also will need sleeves, regardless of weather, though I'm not sure if that's true.) I know it's not going to be like it is on tv, but I have no idea what it is going to be like.

If the subpoena says there are five working days scheduled for the hearing, do I assume I need to clear my calendar 9-5 for all five days? I freelance, so no booking off involved.

And so forth. Amusingly terrible advice and bad legal jokes also welcomed; I suspect I'll be checking in from my seat outside the courtroom...

[Burnaby49]

I'm not sure that my golden rule "Don't wear shorts" applies to you. There's a very basic dress code for spectators at British Columbia trials but I doubt that a subpoenaed witness would be barred from attending for dressing casual. Short sleeves are fine for witnesses here as are jeans and polo and golf shirts. Suits, apart from professional witnesses like police or CRA employees, are rare. I always wear an everyday sweatshirt and dockers.

As far as what court is like in general it's procedurally much like you see in courtroom TV dramas apart from having any actual drama. Generally extremely dull. As far as scheduling goes witnesses in Canada are told the specific day, or days, they can expect to be in attendance to testify. While that's always subject to change they certainly aren't expected to clear their calendars for the entire anticipated length of the trial.

[eric]

For a prelim, most of the scheduling should allready have been figured out, but the Court will sort out any fine details and check that everybody has all their ducks in a row. They want you there at the beginning just to check that you're going to show and they'll tell you when you're required. Roughly half a day sitting around being bored and then when they call you.

For appropriate dress - something clean and neat, definitely no hats. I was always told to dress for whatever impression you desire to make so you can take that however you want.

[obadiah]

Believe it or not, fast forward and watch the courtroom scenes in "My Cousin Vinny".
Law schools (including mine)use it to give a more realistic view of what actual trials are like. I was on a week long jury trial recently and it holds up pretty well.

[JamesVincent]

Neat and comfortable. I don't know what court is like there but here you aren't allowed to bring cell phones in.

[MRN]

Neat and comfortable. I don't know what court is like there but here you aren't allowed to bring cell phones in.

Goddit. I hope that's only the courtroom itself, but I'll take a paperback along in case. Maybe my knitting, too.

[Burnaby49]

You can take cellphones into BC courtrooms but they must be turned off. The sheriffs don't check bags going into courtrooms at the British Columbia Supreme Court but the Provincial court of British Columbia has airport level security with the X-ray baggage reader and the personal wanding before you're allowed into the courthouse.

[wserra]

If the subpoena says there are five working days scheduled for the hearing, do I assume I need to clear my calendar 9-5 for all five days?

Email (so you have a record) the lawyer who subpoenaed you. Tell that lawyer that you require a specific day and time to appear. If the lawyer responds that s/he doesn't know, reply that this is unacceptable, since it's unreasonable to expect you to clear your calendar for a whole week. Every jurisdiction of which I'm aware requires subpoenas to be returnable on a specific date and time, and at a specific place. "Subject to telephone call" is generally acceptable, but making you guess is not.

[MRN]

If the subpoena says there are five working days scheduled for the hearing, do I assume I need to clear my calendar 9-5 for all five days?

Email (so you have a record) the lawyer who subpoenaed you. Tell that lawyer that you require a specific day and time to appear.

Oooh, that's extremely useful. It's the Crown, so, you know, I guess I just assumed that they get to do whatever they want about that.

I don't have contact info for them on the subpoena, but I assume they'll be kicking about at the courthouse today.

It occurs to me belatedly that I may find some sov-citty goodness after all, as the pro-contagion crowd have been kicking about the courthouse area of late. One may hope.

[MRN]

If the subpoena says there are five working days scheduled for the hearing, do I assume I need to clear my calendar 9-5 for all five days?

Email (so you have a record) the lawyer who subpoenaed you. Tell that lawyer that you require a specific day and time to appear.

Oooh, that's extremely useful. It's the Crown, so, you know, I guess I just assumed that they get to do whatever they want about that.

I don't have contact info for them on the subpoena*, but I assume they'll be kicking about at the courthouse today.

It occurs to me belatedly that I may find some sov-citty goodness after all, as the pro-contagion crowd have been kicking about the courthouse area of late. One may hope.

*I mean, I do, obviously, they're The Crown, but no indication of who I would actually have to speak to, so I didn't try calling, for fear of instead spending 5 working days listening to extremely plinky classical music.

[NYGman]

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. You must first look into the courtroom and see if the flag has a gold Fringe, otherwise you'll never know if you're under admiralty law or not. Also remember to refuse to understand, as you stand under no one. Be sure to also covertly video record the whole thing and immediately posted on YouTube when you get home, that is of course unless you're unable to stream live from the courtroom. Also lastly, remember to have fun it's not a real courtroom after all, they're all in there pretending playing dress up in a rented room.

[MRN]

Also remember to refuse to understand, as you stand under no one.

...

it's not a real courtroom after all, they're all in there pretending playing dress up in a rented room.

So, about that ... I definitely don’t understand and either it’s an imaginary courtroom (actually it’s a virtual one, which was very much not on the paperwork anywhere) or it’s real and I’m a figment of someone’s imagination. Or the courtroom and I are real but the subpoena (and the nice officer who served me with it) is imaginary.

The upshot of the last hour has been: nobody in the entire building knows why I was subpoenaed, neither the Crown nor the defence wishes to accept any responsibility for me whatsoever, the lovely investigating officer swears this has never happened to him before and is sorry I’ve been trrrrrroubled, ma’am, and I may take my superfluous self off for a nice late breakfast on Elgin Street.

So apparently it’s a typical case of Canadian blind justice, and there ain’t nothin’ I can do about it.

[Burnaby49]

The upshot of the last hour has been: nobody in the entire building knows why I was subpoenaed, neither the Crown nor the defence wishes to accept any responsibility for me whatsoever, the lovely investigating officer swears this has never happened to him before and is sorry I’ve been trrrrrroubled, ma’am, and I may take my superfluous self off for a nice late breakfast on Elgin Street.

I'm surprised. I've had an extensive history of interaction with Crown both during my time as an CRA auditor and as a post-retirement voyeur and I've always found them very helpful both to myself (as a witness in CRA days) and to defendants. Crown here tries to keep their witnesses fully informed as to the state of proceedings and, while events often get sidelined, give their best estimate of when witnesses are needed. As far as contacting Crown is concerned here in Vancouver Crown lawyers always give potential witnesses their office email addresses so they can be contacted directly.

Courts here are in post-covid transition but it is my understanding that they are now open for spectators. I just had an email exchange with a Crown counsel about this yesterday because I plan to attend a hearing in early July and I needed to know the protocol. The answer I got was that in some instances parties attend in-person, in others parties agree to attend by phone or video link (using MS Teams). If a hearing is in-person, the courtroom is probably open subject to distancing however everyone entering a courthouse has to answer screening questions and wear a mask at all times. I was advised to phone the court registry prior to the hearing for specific details.

[wserra]

As far as contacting Crown is concerned here in Vancouver Crown lawyers always give potential witnesses their office email addresses so they can be contacted directly.

You were served a subpoena without a name, let alone a signature? I didn't realize that you were in Canada, but it's still hard to believe. Canadian law permits this? In the U.S., in federal civil matters, the clerk of the particular district issues the subpoena, but the lawyer seeking it must fill in name, address, email and telephone number. In most state civil matters, a lawyer issues the subpoena, and must include the same. A prosecutor seeking to subpoena a witness does so in the name of the office (or grand jury), but must include his/her own information.

Bizarre.

[MRN]

As far as contacting Crown is concerned here in Vancouver Crown lawyers always give potential witnesses their office email addresses so they can be contacted directly.

You were served a subpoena without a name, let alone a signature?

It is the bedamndest thing, isn't it? Not that I realized that until I got there, being green in this regard. No names except for the investigating police officer's, no signature but the JP's. Accompanying letter just says "Crown Attorney Ottawa."

Oh, well. At least it meant I could call the victim's sister and be supportive while she watches the hearing without being worried that us talking would somehow be a problem.

We still didn't discuss the case as the IO said he couldn't guarantee that I wouldn't get a subpoena for the actual trial, but at least I could call her.

ETA: They were very helpful TODAY, I note. Puzzled, but helpful. But as far as the period between February when they served me and today, not a sausage. I am only now realizing how weird that is.

In my partial defence, that was a rotten day for me personally and for my neighbourhood in general and between that and a vague feeling that excessive introspection is how people end up swearing to things they didn't actually see at the time, I've avoided thinking about it much.

[JamesVincent]

Let us know if you get some sort of definitive answer. Let Wes said that's really weird.

[MRN]

Let us know if you get some sort of definitive answer. Let Wes said that's really weird.

After kicking it around in dms with Burnaby and Wes, turns out it's less Actually Weird, more me describing it poorly because I didn't know what was usual, plus a bit of Canada Does It Different.

Current leading theory is that they actually wanted me for the trial, not the pre-trial, and they mucked up their dates, because according to the victim's sister several other people also got subpoenaed and then weren't wanted.

For extra fun I somehow managed to show up on the wrong day, and also wasn't supposed to be there in person because it was all on Zoom.

Which is embarrassing. But the IO specified that they hadn't had me down for ANY day, so that wasn't it.

Meh. It's a murder, I wouldn't actually MIND being way more inconvenienced. I'm gonna put the remaining oddity down to gestures wildly at everything