Lac-mégantic trial: the wait begins
Quebec Superior Court Judge Gaetan Dumas delivered his final instructions to the jury on Wednesday in the Criminal Negligence trial of the three former Montreal Maine and Atlantic railway employees implicated in the train derailment at Lac-mégantic. Those directives in hand, the jury will now be sequestered until the 12 members can come to a unanimous verdict for each of the accused; Train conductor and engineer Thomas Harding, operations manager Jean Demaître, and railway traffic controller Richard Labrie.
“When we started this case, and at different times during the trial, I told you about several rules of law that apply in general, or to some of the evidence as it was received. Those instructions still apply,” Dumas began. “Now, I am going to give you further instructions. These instructions will cover a number of topics. Consider them as a whole. Do not single out some as more important and pay less or no attention to others. I am giving them to help you make a decision, not to tell you what decision to make.”
In his presentation, the judge emphasized the fact that while he is the judge of the law, it is the responsibility
of the jury to judge the facts and determine if the prosecution has proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, that the three accused are guilty of causing the deaths of 47 people through criminal negligence between July 4, 2013 and July 6, 2013. In making those points, he repeated his statements from the opening of the trial that this is neither a trial of the MMA Company nor Royal Commission.
“The three persons accused are not accused of having conspired to be aiding in or encouraging each other of criminal negligence,” Dumas said. “They are accused of criminal negligence by their own independent and individual conduct between the 4th and the 6th July 2013. Therefore, you must analyze the proof the same way you would do it if it was three distinct trials against three accused.” The judge referred to that last element as “an intellectual exercise,” pointing out that jurors will need to be diligent in understanding what evidence can be applied to which individuals. He also stressed the fact that although his instructions are a matter of public record, and can thus be examined in a court of appeal, the jury’s deliberations will always be secret. Given that fact, the judge highlighted the importance of impartiality, patience, and careful attention in the work of deliberation.
“You must consider the evidence and make your decision without sympathy, prejudice or fear,” he said. “You must not be influenced by public opinion. Your duty as jurors is to assess the evidence impartially.”
Harding, Demaître, and Labrie have all plead not-guilty, and Justice Dumas repeated the fact that they are all presumed innocent unless the evidence presented by the Crown has proven otherwise.
“It is virtually impossible to prove anything to an absolute certainty, and the Crown is not required to do so. Such a standard would be impossibly high,” Dumas said. “However, the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt falls much closer to absolute certainty than to probable guilt.”
He urged the jurors not to jump to conclusions based on particular testimony, encouraging them instead to carefully consider the evidence presented as a whole.