Joinder and Severance: Accused

• Author: Steve Coughlan/Alex Gorlewski
• Pages: 292-295

292 The Trial Process / Informations and Indictments

3.1(c) Joinder and Severance: Accused

Did the co-accused commit the oence together?1

Yes No

Is the oence under ss 354,

355.4, or 356(1)(b)?2

No

Yes

Do the co-accused include both

young persons and adults?3

Yes

No

Do the interests of justice

require separate trials?4

Yes

No

The accused shall be

tried together5

The accused shall be

tried separately5

1. DID THE CO-ACCUSED COMMIT THE OFFENCE TOGETHER?

The general rule is that accused persons who are charged with having com-

mitted an oence together should be tried together. The rationale for that ap-

proach was stated in R v Crawford, [1995] 1SCR 858 (and quoted in R v Chow,

2005 SCC 24):

[30] There exist ... strong policy reasons for accused persons charged with

oences arising out of the same event or series of events to be tried joint-

ly.The policy reasons apply with equal or greater force when each accused

blames the other or others, a situation which is graphically labelled a “cut-

throat defence”.Separate trials in these situations create a risk of inconsistent

verdicts.The policy against separate trials is summarized by Elliott, supra, at

p. 17, as follows:

There is a dilemma here which could only be avoided by separate trials.But

separate trials will not be countenanced because, quite apart from the extra

cost and delay involved, it is undeniable that the full truth about an incident is