THE CASE OF THE ONE DOOR JUDGE

The story
Edmonton Journal February 11, 2010
"A judge has ordered a mistrial in a sexual assault case after a Crown prosecutor locked a courtroom door while the teenage complainant was testifying.
….
"Court of Queen's Bench Justice Vital Ouellette ruled the accused's right to a public hearing was breached and that declaring a mistrial was the only appropriate remedy.
Arguing for the Crown, Jim Stewart said that locking one of two doors was to prevent people from entering in clear view of the complainant, who was testifying behind a screen.
Crown prosecutors must now decide if they will try the case again."
Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Locked+courtroom+door+leads+mistrial+Edmonton+assault+case/2548458/story.html#ixzz0fIbFc5Yp

Comments on the story.
It is stories like this that make it easy to believe that the legal establishment has an distinct inclination to act in ways that increase the employment of lawyers and judges.
I fully expect the crown will decide to try the case again, the judge will decide to hear the case again and nothing additional will have been accomplished.

As for the "only appropriate remedy". perhaps they could have just continued with the trial with one door available. I strongly believe that there exist now and always have existed courtrooms with only one door.