R v MacGowan

The case of R v MacGowan arose from the striking and empanelling of a jury in a criminal trial. The dispute centred around the proper procedure to follow when a juror is discharged just before the jury is to deliberate. Specifically, the issue was whether the reserve juror should move into the discharged juror's position or whether a new juror should be selected to fill the discharged juror's spot.

The legal issues before the court were twofold: first, whether the reserve juror should replace the discharged juror, and second, whether a new juror should be selected to assume the position of the discharged juror. The court had to interpret the relevant legal frameworks governing jury selection and empanelment in light of the circumstances of this case.

The court considered the statutory provisions and common law principles applicable to jury selection. It concluded that the reserve juror should not move into the discharged juror's position, as this would contravene the established process for jury selection. Instead, a new juror should be selected to fill the position of the discharged juror. This decision was based on the need to maintain the integrity and impartiality of the jury selection process, ensuring that the final jury was properly constituted according to law.

Accordingly, the court ordered that the discharged juror be replaced by a new juror selected through the appropriate process. The jury was then empanelled with 12 members, including the new juror, for the purposes of deliberation in the trial.