Gillian Guess (born 1955) is a Vancouver woman who was convicted in 1998 of obstruction of justice after becoming romantically involved with a murder defendant while she was a juror in his 1995 trial. Her case became significant because it set legal precedents in four areas of Canadian Law: it was the first case where a juror had sexual relations with a murder defendant during his trial; the only case where a juror has faced criminal sanction for the decision they have made; the only case in Canadian law where jury room discussions were made part of the public record. Regarding the sanctity of juror deliberations up until Guess was arrested, there was no law in Canada that made her actions illegal and moreover, the procedures used in her trial may have violated Guess' rights under the Canadian Charter. A portion of Guess' trial was closed to both her and the press and Guess' attorney was not allowed to discuss this portion of the trial with her. The Secret Trial Shortly after the acquittal in the Regina v. Johal trial, Gillian Guess was investigated by Canadian authorities so as to determine whether she had obstructed justice during her tenure as juror in the aforementioned trial. Various surveillance devices - from wiretaps of Ms. Guess and her circle of acquaintances to an electronic bug placed in Ms. Guess' bedroom - were employed in furtherance of this investigation. The resulting evidence obtained was voluminous, and various hearings were held during which the legality of the surveillance evidence was contested. These hearings were conducted in secret and are sealed. Guess' defense counsel could not, by order of the court, disclose the content of these hearings to any party not present at the hearings. Guess herself was not allowed at the hearings and her counsel could not relate to her what transpired at the hearings. The secret hearing, wherein the court enjoins all those present from disclosing the contents of the hearing and simultaneously refuses to offer the defendant admittance to the hearing, was unprecedented in Canadian law. Guess was never given an explanation as to why the hearings were conducted in secret. Analysis by Harvard Law School The secret proceedings presented a plethora of problems, but two issues manifested themselves with a common strain of argument. Effectiveness of Counsel The court's order that Ms. Guess' attorney could not share with her the contents