It is time for all of us to learn something from Boushie’s death
If there is going to be any good derived from a young man’s senseless death, it begins with the knowledge we gain from it.
Wednesday’s announcement that Saskatchewan’s public prosecutions office will not appeal Gerald Stanley’s not-guilty verdict in the death of Red Pheasant First Nation resident Colten Boushie should not have been unexpected.
With the 30-day window for appeal of the Feb. 9 Stanley jury decision quickly closing, assistant deputy attorney general Anthony Gerein took the unusual step of announcing prosecutions had “no basis” for such an appeal.
“I know there is much sadness over the decision not to appeal,” Gerein said. “That is unfortunate, but there can be no appeal because the law does not allow it.”
Gerein provided a textbook lesson in the parameters for such an appeal, which are restricted to errors in law ( but only if the mistake was egregious enough to affect the trial outcome) and most likely confined in a jury trial to the judge’s instructions to the jury.
Having “no basis for concluding the judge (Court of Queen’s Bench Chief Justice Martel Popescul) said or did anything that would justify an appeal,” and stressing that the Crown cannot operate on public perceptions and must have legal grounds for an appeal, Gerein concluded there would be no appeal.
As Gerein predicted, his news drew disappointment — and perhaps even a touch of anger — from legal counsel for the Boushie family, the Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations (FSIN) and others.
Boushie family lawyer Chris Murphy said he sent a letter to provincial Justice Minister Don Morgan earlier this week arguing an error in law did occur when the jury heard evidence from two defence witnesses claiming to having experienced “hang fires” (a gun arbitrarily going off several seconds later).
Others went so far as to imply recent polling suggesting Saskatchewan people saw the Stanley decision as a fair one (contrary to the majority opinion in most other provinces) may have influenced the decision not to appeal.
The latter notion is baseless nonsense likely driven by emotion, but it surely isn’t the first time we’ve seen this. It wasn’t even the first time this week.
We should take the grander perspective that Boushie’s death has given us on the justice system and policing in this province and use it to bring about change through the proper channels.
By no small coincidence this week, Biggar-area residents (some of whom would be Gerald Stanley’s neighbours) met with local RCMP to clarify what actions are permissible in defence of one’s personal property.
Notwithstanding the RCMP’s plea to local residents to call police and avoid confrontations at all costs, some remained convinced they have the right to defend themselves and their property.
A smarter, less emotional conclusion is needed. Perhaps a better place to start would have been a conversation that is centred on rural policing costs that are a fraction of what city dwellers pay.
There are just too many conversations in which too many choose not to listen.
Right now, both sides are all too eager to ignore those in a position of authority, simply because what they have to say doesn’t fit their narrative. This is no healthier than ignoring the justice and policing problems altogether.
If we are ever going to find solutions to the problem, it must begin by listening.
As per Gerein’s very unusual press conference this week, appealing Stanley’s verdict for the sake of appealing doesn’t fix inadequacies in the justice system.
Fixing the justice system involves better ideas for the jury selection process for a more representative jury pool. But this is largely up to legislators who make appointments.
Similarly, fixing the policing problem also can’t be about ignoring what you hear from the police and assuming it’s better to take matters into one’s own hands.
For the sake of Boushie’s memory, let’s make changes, but do it in the right way.