adjourn for this andthus waste valuable time that could be otherwise used for processing other court cases. The Crown Attorney in provincial court was, on the whole, fairly well prepared, efficientlybring relevant facts to attention, friendly and well acquainted to the defence lawyers aswell as the judge, and quick to get to the point that he was trying to prove. There waslittle time wasted, between the arraignment and the sentencing, on the part of the CrownAttorney. In Ontario Supreme Court, the Crown Attorney there seemed well prepared,efficient, and quick, however there seemed to be a lack of personal evolvement in the case,rather he seemed emotionless, just doing his job, not being familiar with the judge or otherpeople in the court room. By the way he presented and dressed, he appeared far morestrict and serious in conduct and appearance than his Provincial Court counterpart. Calling a remand can be helpful in that it allows witnesses, especially key witnesses, to bepresent at a later date when it is possible for them to attend the trial, as duty may call themto do otherwise. The disadvantages, however, are mostly on the accused's part, as s/hemust remain in custody longer in order to be brought back to trial. The necessity for a lawyer for minor offences can sometimes outweigh the cost theaccused must pay for them because the lawyer understands the law and how the systemworks, he might be able to point out some small discrepancies or may suggest what typeand how much punishment is suitable for the accused's crime. The lawyer may also pointout that if the person has a record, how old it really is, as records older than 5 years oldthat are not cleared are disregarded by the judge. They also help the cases progress fasteras an accused legal options will be already made clear to him by his/her lawyer. Lawyers are absolutely necessary for major cases, as the accused may not understand hislegal rights clearly or may not know how to de...
