How the job has changed after almost four decades

The Star asked Det.-Sgt. Gary Giroux about the highs, the lows and the in-betweens of a policing career spanning almost four decades.

This interview has been edited for clarity and length. How have homicides changed since 1997?

When I started, it was well before the escalation of gun and gang-related homicides — based on the aggressive infiltration of gangs into several high-crime urban areas of the city for the sole purpose of making money from drug trafficking.

What is the most significant break you ever got that led to an arrest?

In July 2000, Stuart Cameron broke into an apartment and repeatedly stabbed teen sisters Tina and Theresa Wu. Tina died of her injuries and Theresa survived. Cameron left blood on the metal window track on the way out. DNA from that blood matched a violent sexual assault just a few blocks away.

He eventually confessed and admitted to several other sexual assaults in the same area. He pleaded guilty and received a life sentence.

More recently, male DNA was extracted from under the fingernails of Nighisti Semret, who was attacked and stabbed to death in October 2012 while walking home from work in Cabbagetown. That DNA profile ultimately linked to the murder and dismemberment of Rigat Ghirmay, whose remains were found in May 2013 — Adonay Zekarias was already in custody for her murder.

In both the Cameron and Zekarias cases, when I spoke to the forensic biologists their voices were shaking when they told me the DNA link.

What is the biggest obstacle to solving murders? And what can be done about it?

The lack of witness participation is the single-biggest hurdle to solving violent crime. The justice system requires a witness to provide a video statement under oath that must be disclosed to the defence. That same witness must testify in open court not only at a preliminary hearing, but at a trial. Then that same witness will often have little choice but to return to the same community to continue to live. This problem will remain long after I am gone.

If you could change one thing about the criminal justice system what would it be?

I would like individuals arrested with a firearm to be detained. On a number of occasions, individuals who are the subject of murder investigations are not only on bail for other offences, but those other offences are firearm-possession related. Incarceration may prevent other homicides.

What is the best thing about the job?

A new and active murder investigation coming together with an overwhelming amount of evidence — so much so that you would like to bottle some of it and use it on your next case. Also, that feeling when the jury files into the court- room and convicts an offender you have been investigating and prosecuting for years. The worst? Acquittals. I have found those disappointments stay with you always — fortunately there haven’t been that many. Why did you stay so long in homicide?

I always aspired to be a homicide detective; it’s all I ever wanted to be. I would like to be remembered for my contribution to the safety and security of the city of Toronto.

Most first-degree murder trials are in front of a judge and jury — would you change that?

It’s often felt that the trial in general — juries’ responsibility to evaluate witnesses; to determine credibility; believe all, some or none of a witness testimony; listen to and understand both the positions of the Crown and defence, and the judge’s closing legal instructions — is just too much for the average person, and that a judge-alone trial may be more beneficial.

I have seen juries get it wrong or overthink it to the point they seem to get lost in the overwhelming amount of information and legal instructions that they are given. What are you going to get up to in retirement?

A bit of time off, a family wedding and a let’s wait and see going forward.