Retrial ordered in conspiracy to kill spouses

Lovers relieved After Appeal rules errors in law made in Conviction

REGINA A new trial has been ordered for two lovers convicted of conspiring to murder their spouses.

Curtis Vey, of Wakaw, and Angela Nicholson, of Melfort, were found guilty in a Prince Albert court in June 2016. They subsequently appealed their convictions, alleging numerous errors in law.

In a decision released Wednesday, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has now set aside the convictions, sending the case back for another trial.

The primary evidence at the original trial was a July 2013 recording that Vey’s wife, Brigitte, surreptitiously made in their home. She suspected her husband was having an affair. But the recording appeared to suggest something much worse.

Vey and Nicholson seemed to be discussing plans to burn down the house with Brigitte inside. It was also suggested that Vey might put some kind of sleeping pills into the coffee of Nicholson’s estranged husband, Jim Taylor, after which he would “go missing.”

Nicholson’s lawyer, Ron Piché, said he spoke with his client Wednesday. He said she was “delighted” with the appeal court decision.

“The good news was a little overwhelming for her,” he said. “She’s been living under this cloud for about four years.”

Vey’s lawyer, Aaron Fox, said he and his client are “pleased” the Court of Appeal agreed with some of their arguments. He said it’s rare to see a conviction overturned.

“Now it’s a bit of a wait and see,” he said, noting the Crown will now have to decide whether to retry Vey and Nicholson or drop the matter altogether. He expects that decision is likely to come within two months, though he stressed that any new trial is unlikely to come before spring 2019.

During the police investigation of the alleged conspiracy, Vey and Nicholson had both told officers they had no intention to follow through with the violence they discussed. Their lawyers maintained that position throughout the trial. Fox argued the pair were “miles away” from taking action.

But the jury disagreed, and Justice Martel Popescul opted to give both three-year sentences. The pair were later released pending the appeal, which was heard in December. Writing on behalf of the province’s top court, Justice Georgina Jackson agreed with the defence that there were errors in the trial judge’s charge to the jury.

The decision was made unanimous by Justices Maurice Herauf and Lian Schwann.

Jackson wrote that it was not made plain to jurors that, in order to convict, they had to be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that both Vey and Nicholson had “a genuine intention to agree to commit murder.”

Further, the jurors should have been told “they could not draw an inference of guilt from circumstantial evidence unless it were the only reasonable inference that the evidence permitted,” Jackson wrote.

But the appeals court rejected a number of other defence arguments, including concerns over alleged pressure on jurors. Fox suggested that one juror had spoken to a bailiff about “concerns” related to the verdict, while Piché cited reports that a relative of Taylor’s approached a juror.

Jackson said there was nothing to suggest the contact with the relative was “questionable or would lead to a reasonable apprehension of bias.” As for the conversation with the bailiff, she said the trial judge was right in not pursuing the matter further.

Even as the appeal process continued to play out, Nicholson has been trying to get on with her life, according to Piché. She attended her daughter’s wedding last summer, he said. Special arrangements needed to be made, Piché added, as Taylor was also due to attend.

“It was a little awkward,” said the lawyer.

Piché was not able to reveal whether Vey and Nicholson are maintaining a relationship of any kind.