Forcillo gets bail
After one night in jail, cop freed until appeal hearing A14
Const. James Forcillo was released from custody after one night in the Toronto South Detention Centre and will spend the next several months under house arrest, a judge ruled Friday.
Forcillo, 33, will remain on bail until the eve of his appeal hearing next year. He is seeking to have his conviction for the attempted murder of Sammy Yatim quashed or a new trial ordered on the charge of attempted murder only.
If the Crown doesn’t appeal Forcillo’s acquittal on the charge of second-degree murder, it is highly unlikely there will be a new trial on the murder charge, said criminal appeals lawyer Michael Dineen, who was not involved in the case.
It is not unusual for offenders to be granted bail pending appeal, even for charges as serious as murder, if the court finds there are strong grounds for appeal and the offender is not a flight risk and poses no threat to public safety.
Justice Eileen Gillese’s decision hinged on whether Forcillo’s incarceration pending appeal was necessary for public confidence in the administration of justice.
Gillese found the argument by Forcillo’s lawyers that the verdicts were inconsistent was strong enough and unusual enough that the public in- terest lies in having his conviction reviewed by a higher court, rather than in seeing him begin to serve his six-year prison sentence.
“Despite the seriousness of the offence for which the Appellant stands convicted,” she wrote, “in my view, fully informed members of the community will objectively understand and accept that it is not contrary to the public interest that he be released.”
And though Gillese also emphasized the need for the appeal to be heard as swiftly as possible, ordering lawyers to provide an update to a judge by Nov. 9, many were upset by the decision that allows Forcillo to remain at home for several months even after the harsh words of the sentencing judge.
Criminal defence and constitutional lawyer Annamaria Enenajor, who wasn’t involved in the case, said there can be a disconnect between what the courts may consider to be supporting public confidence in the justice system and what the public actually feels.
“As a member of the public, I’m outraged by the conduct of Officer Forcillo but I also I view it in the broader context of police violence and impunity. So my understanding of what diminishes my confidence in the administration of justice might be quite different than that of a judge who is really only dealing only with the case in front of them,” she said.
“The reasonable person, who according to the court who is the holder of the public opinion, is somebody who trusts the police, believes the police implicitly and has confidence in them. And that’s not generally representative of many members of society.”
Lawyer Peter Rosenthal, who has represented the families of police shooting victims, believes the jury verdicts were consistent and will withstand the scrutiny of the Court of Appeal.
“There was a finding that the first volley of shots was justified and the second was not, there is no inconsistency in that finding. But it is complicated in the way the two are interwoven,” said Rosenthal, who wasn’t involved in the case. “Most people would think that the jury found guilt on attempted murder as a compromise. We’ll never know because we are not able to find out what happened during jury deliberations.”
It is expected the appeal would be heard in spring 2017 before a panel of three judges.
Forcillo is required to surrender himself into custody on the day before the appeal hearing begins. Whether he remains in jail during the hearing is unclear and may depend on how long it is scheduled to last and whether the judges reserve their decision.