Challenge for cause

Justice Benotto's decision in R v. Pechaluk, released today, deals with the issue of challenge of jurors for cause. Her reasons are as yet unreported but read, in part:

It is our belief that jurors mean what they say when they answer that they will be able to render an impartial verdict. It is our belief that they take their oath seriously. An undesirable candidate is not one who has a prejudice but one who might not be able to set it aside.

The personal beliefs of the potential juror are not in issue. What is in issue is whether the person is capable of putting those beliefs aside in order to render an impartial verdict. If the bias exists, the juror must be able to put it aside in order to be impartial as between the Crown and the Defence.