As family grieves, answers are lacking
Publication ban leaves rumours flying
It was a courtroom moment like none I’ve ever witnessed.
While a cordon of eight sheriffs and two city police officers stood guard, Judge Janet Dixon read her reasons for granting bail to Richard Suter.
Suter, 62, is the man accused of impaired driving causing the death of two-year-old Geo Mounsef. The boy died last Sunday after an Acura SUV crashed through the glass wall of the patio of the Terwillegar Ric’s Grill, where his family was dining.
The horrific incident shocked many. The crowds of protesters who gathered inside and outside the courthouse this week were unprecedented. Many were members of Geo’s large extended family — Cree on his mother’s side, Lebanese on his father’s. Others were strangers, drawn there via a vigorous Facebook campaign, launched by Geo’s grieving mother, Sage Morin.
For days, the large courtroom has been packed, with a crowd that included fussing babies and restive preschoolers.
Dixon’s explanation for her ruling was thoughtful and thorough, delivered with eloquence and compassion.
But few stayed to hear her. Instead, the dead child’s family members and their supporters stormed out the moment they realized Suter would be released. Many shouted profane abuse at the court and at Suter, who was, almost surreally, watching the scene via video from the Edmonton Remand Centre.
Her voice breaking only briefly under the barrage of ugly invective, Dixon calmly carried on, ordering that Suter refrain from using alcohol or any other intoxicants, remain in Edmonton at his current address, and submit to regular blood, urine and breath tests. His driver’s licence has already been suspended, under provincial law.
You’d probably like to know why Dixon made her ruling. I’d certainly like to tell you. But all the evidence Dixon heard at the bail hearing is subject to an automatic publication ban. The judge had no discretion. Under the terms of a 2010 Supreme Court of Canada ruling, she was compelled to order the ban as soon as it was requested by the lawyer for the accused, Dino Bottos.
The Criminal Code says bail can only be denied on three grounds: that the accused is a flight risk who might not appear at trial, that the accused poses a danger to the community, or that releasing the accused would outrage the community and put justice into disrepute. Courts aren’t supposed to refuse bail to punish people before trial, but only to protect the public good. And bail is granted in most impaired-driving cases as a matter of course.
But I cannot tell you, why, specifically, Dixon granted bail here.
At best, I can remind you that life is complicated and so are human beings.
Ostensibly, the mandatory publication ban protects the right of the accused to a fair trial because it means the potential jury pool won’t be contaminated by hearing the preliminary evidence that was part of the bail hearing.
In reality, the lack of accurate and truthful reporting means our whole community risks contamination by rumour, gossip and misinformation.
If you knew all the reasons for Dixon’s careful decision, you might or might not agree with her. But at least you would be in possession of all the facts and context. Instead, the public is left baffled and angry. That truly brings the administration of justice into disrepute.
Meantime, in a world of 24/7 viral social media, such publication bans are becoming more and more futile. The ban doesn’t apply just to professional journalists, but to every citizen.
In theory, no one can publish any of the details of the bail hearing on Twitter or Facebook. But how can the police monitor a city’s worth of Tweets and Facebook posts?
I understand why Geo’s family is outraged. They’ve been robbed of their beautiful boy, in the most cruel, random and shocking way. His parents had to watch their son dying before them. That excruciating pain will never end.
And I understand why the community shares that fury. Impaired driving is a scourge that puts every one of us at risk.
But a bail hearing is not a trial, and courts are venues for justice, not vengeance. Judges cannot be cowed or swayed by courtroom scenes or Facebook protests. They must apply the law dispassionately, no matter what the popular sentiment.
When this case goes to trial, when all the complicated facts are made public, I hope there will be justice for Geo, and justice for Richard Suter, too. Until then, I grieve for two families ripped apart and for a community that deserves answers, but so far getting none.