No decision from Crown on appeal in Stanley case

Farmer due in court in March on two firearms-related charges

A jury found Gerald Stanley not guilty of second-degree murder in the 2016 shooting death of Colten Boushie, but the Saskatchewan farmer’s legal battles are not completely over.

Stanley still faces two charges of unsafe storage of a firearm in relation to events that unfolded on the day Boushie died. The charges are slated to be dealt with March 19 in North Battleford provincial court.

Meanwhile, provincial officials say no decision has been made yet about whether the Crown will file an appeal seeking a new trial in Stanley’s murder case.

If found guilty of the firearm-related charges, Stanley would face a maximum sentence of two years if it is his first offence and up to five years if he has more than one prior conviction.

Over the course of Stanley’s two-week trial, which concluded Friday, a jury heard that Stanley owned several firearms, including two handguns that were in his shed on the day Boushie died. One of those guns — a Tokarev pistol — fired the shot that killed Boushie.

Stanley told the jury he normally used the Tokarev to fire warning shots from his deck to scare coyotes.

Boushie, a Cree man from Red Pheasant First Nation, was 22 years old on Aug. 9, 2016, when he and four friends drove an SUV onto Stanley’s farm north of Biggar in the Rural Municipality of Glenside. According to witness testimony presented during Stanley’s trial, at least one occupant of the SUV attempted to start a quad on Stanley’s property and the SUV then collided with a vehicle parked on Stanley’s property. Boushie was sitting in the driver’s seat of the SUV when he was killed by a single gunshot to the head.

A jury acquitted Stanley on Friday night after more than a day of deliberating. Members of Boushie’s family reacted with anger, sadness and disbelief.

Some said the justice system failed them and has repeatedly failed Indigenous people. They said they would lobby for an appeal.

Boushie’s family has criticized how RCMP investigated the case, how officers communicated with them and the way the Crown prosecutor presented the facts of the case.

Family members and supporters have also been critical of the way the jury was selected for Stanley’s trial; all visibly Indigenous potential jurors were challenged by the defence, leaving a jury that appeared to be all white.

If the Crown launches an appeal, it can only do so by arguing that an error of law was made, not simply because it doesn’t like the verdict, noted Brian Pfefferle, a Saskatoonbased criminal defence lawyer who followed Stanley ’s trial. An appeal would have to be filed within 30 days of the verdict.

“If the trial judge was correct in making rulings and correct in his or her instructions, it becomes virtually insurmountable for either party — but particularly the Crown — to argue that there has been some miscarriage of justice and that an appeal is warranted in the circumstances,” Pfefferle said.

Members of Boushie’s family and Indigenous leaders have been vocally critical of Bill Burge, the Crown prosecutor in Stanley’s trial. Pfefferle said he can’t imagine a scenario in which the way Burge chose to prosecute the case would lead to an appeal.

“I personally cannot think of any case where Crown conduct has led to a Crown appeal,” Pfefferle said. “Crown conduct leading to a Crown appeal, that to me seems like a novel argument that likely wouldn’t get much traction unless the conduct was significantly egregious.”

As he left the courthouse Friday night after the verdict was announced, Burge was asked about the possibility of a Crown appeal.

“All the evidence that could have been presented was presented and that’s all I can say,” he said. “This will be considered by my colleagues ... we’ll look at the charge to the jury and look at any rulings made — and there were very few rulings made in the course of this trial, it was a very straightforward, factual trial — but we will take all of that into consideration.”

Burge was not in his office Monday and requests for him to comment on the Stanley trial were referred to the provincial Ministry of Justice. In an emailed statement, a ministry spokesperson declined to comment on the basis that “no determination has been made yet about whether to appeal.”

Stanley testified in his own defence at the trial — his only public statement to date. He said he hadn’t meant to hurt anyone. Stanley said he got his gun to fire warning shots after Boushie and his friends came into in his yard and he believed his gun was empty when he approached Boushie. He said the bullet that killed Boushie was the result of a hang fire — a rare phenomenon where there is a perceptible delay between when the trigger is pulled and when the gun goes off.

Stanley’s defence lawyer, Scott Spencer, argued Stanley was behaving the way a reasonable person would be expected to in the circumstances.

I personally cannot think of any case where Crown conduct has led to a Crown appeal.