ACQUITTAL IN DEATH OF INDIGENOUS MAN
First Nations leaders react with dismay after Hamilton verdict
HAMILTON— A Hamilton homeowner was acquitted Wednesday in the shooting death of a Six Nations man who he thought was breaking into his truck one night two years ago.
Peter Khill, 28, had admitted he killed Jon Styres about 3 a.m. on Feb. 4, 2016, but pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder, saying he fired in selfdefence when he thought Styres was pointing a gun at him.
Styres, a 29-year-old father of two from Ohsweken, Ont., on the Six Nations reserve, did not have a gun at the time of the shooting, the trial heard.
The mother of Styres’ children broke into loud sobs and had to leave the court after the jury delivered its verdict.
Khill remained stoic as the verdict was read out. Once the proceedings were finished, he embraced his tearful wife, who is six months pregnant with the couple’s first child.
His lawyer said later Khill told him he was grateful for the verdict.
“He said, ‘I just want to thank the jury for the way they dealt with the evidence and in addition thank family and friends for their support,’ ” Jeffrey Manishen told reporters outside court.
The Six Nations Elected Council called on the Crown to appeal the trial’s outcome.
“How can Indigenous people have faith in the relationship with Canada when the justice system fails to hold anyone accountable for the taking of a life?” Elected Chief Ava Hill said.
Khill’s trial garnered attention for its similarities to a recent Saskatchewan case, in which white farmer Gerald Stanley was acquitted in the shooting death of young Indigenous man Colten Boushie.
“Jonathan Styres, Colten Boushie (and other Indigenous victims) were all born with mothers and fathers, raised as children with hopes and dreams and were loved as adults with families and responsibilities,” Hill said. “It is unfath-
“When Indigenous people are killed by non-Indigenous people, it is very often considered justifiable homicide.” ROBYN PITAWANAKWAT INDIGENOUS PEOPLES ADVOCATE
omable that their tragic deaths are unanswered by the Canadian justice system.”
A spokesperson for Indigenous advocacy group Justice for Our Stolen Children called Khill’s acquittal “typical.”
“For some reason, when Indigenous people are killed by non-Indigenous people, it is very often considered justifiable homicide,” said Robyn Pitawanakwat.
Her group has been outside the Saskatchewan legislature since February protesting Stanley’s acquittal.
They’ve also been protesting the acquittal of Manitoba man Raymond Cormier, charged with second-degree murder in the death of Indigenous teenager Tina Fontaine.
The legal proceedings had been particularly stressful for Khill and his wife, Melinda Benko, Khill’s lawyer said. “Even the issue of deciding to get married not that long before the trial, that was certainly one they had to consider, but I think their support for one another is very strong,” Manishen said.
Styres’ family said they would not comment or answer questions about the trial or its outcome.
The trial heard that Khill and Benko awoke to the sound of banging outside their rural home early on a February morning in 2016. Khill looked out the window and saw Styres inside his truck, the jury heard. Khill loaded his shotgun, left the home through the back door and went to confront Styres, court heard.
At trial, Khill testified that he had yelled at Styres to put his hands up and fired as Styres began to turn toward him. Styres was facing sideways with his hands at waist height when he was shot, Crown lawyer Steve O’Brien told the jury.
Only after Khill fired two shots at Styres did Benko call 911.
The Crown argued at trial that Styres did not pose a reasonable threat to Khill and Benko while they were inside their locked home, and that Khill should have called 911 and waited for police rather than run out of the house with a loaded shotgun.
Manishen told the jury Khill was simply following his training as a military reservist to “neutralize” a threat to his life.
“Soldiers react proactively, that’s how they are trained,” Manishen said in his closing address. “Mr. Khill said that’s why he acted the way he acted. To take control of the situation.”
Manishen told reporters he thought Khill’s military service was significant to determining whether Khill had acted reasonably to defend himself under the circumstances.