Boushie trial shows our justice system isn’t working
Re Anger over Colten Boushie hold important lessons for Canada, Editorial,
Feb. 12 The acquittal of Gerald Stanley in the shooting death of Colten Boushie from the Red Pheasant First Nation in Saskatchewan is a stark reminder of how much work still needs to be done to address systemic and systematic racism in Canada.
Key to this process is education, a position held by the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples and the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC).
Although federal action to restrict peremptory challenges in jury selection and other measures to make the legal system fair to Indigenous peoples must be prioritized, so too must provincial and territorial efforts to educate all students from Kindergarten to Grade 12 on the treaties, residential schools and the positive historical and contemporary contributions of Indigenous peoples to Canada.
Without this education, called for by the TRC, justice for Indigenous peoples, both within the justice system and in society as a whole, will not be possible. Ed Bianchi, program manager, Kairos Canada, Ottawa Our justice system needs overhauling. How can we call ourselves a democratic society when not all people are treated equally?
The law states that an accused person facing a jury should be judged by his or her peers. When those peers are all white and there is no representative from the Indigenous community, then there cannot be an open and honest assessment of guilt or innocence. There were opportunities to appoint Indigenous jurists but they were rejected. What a mockery to our system. Pearl Silver, Toronto
“A jury of descendants of European settlers acquits one of their own. Anyone not offended or surprised by this verdict needs to take a long and serious honest look at the origin of bigotry inherent in this colony.” TED TURNER TORONTO
Last weekend, there were various well-organized peaceful demonstrations indicating the high level of outrage throughout the country over the Colten Boushie verdict. But of course the die was cast the moment the defence counsel was allowed to peremptorily challenge (no reason needs to be given) all 14 of the 14 Indigenous people on the potential jury panel. Many civilized countries have done away with the law that allows this kind of discrimination.
Thus, we are confronted with the question of whether we wish to continue to live in a colonial country, one where the lives of Indigenous citizens are valued much less than those of Euro-Canadian background. Statements about “doing better” have been heard from some of our federal leaders, with predictable political pushback from Conservatives). We will see if our colonial reality will really be challenged. Lawlor Wm. Lee, Toronto Five years ago, the elimination of peremptory challenges was recommended by retired Supreme Court of Canada Justice Frank Iacobucci. Senator Murray Sinclair, head of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, made the same recommendation. Nothing has happened. It’s time for action now.
Canada should immediately establish a Royal Commission to advise the judiciary and civil servants to solve delays and demand timely funding from government for the three different trial systems — criminal, civil and family — so that the rule of law is properly decided across Canada, especially for Indigenous peoples, adults with mental-health issues and families with child-welfare problems.
Justice should be designed and legislated for the people needing justice rather than just for lawyers, judges and experts. The three legal systems should be viewed through the lens of reconciliation to see the ways in which the laws can become part of the solutions to the litigants’ legal problems, reconciliation and solutions. Willson McTavish, Q.C. LSM, Mississauga As a former jury foreman in the murder trial of a minority person, I take umbrage at comments by both the prime minister and the justice minister regarding the verdict in the Boushie trial.
Emotionally, the feelings are understandable. But our country’s leaders should understand this is the process jurors work under.
People from all walks of life are taken from their families and jobs, are sequestered for days, weeks or months and are expected to come up with a unanimous decision. The deliberations can be tiring and acrimonious as jurors struggle to discern fact from conjecture and arrive at a verdict that is “beyond a reasonable doubt” in what are often grey areas.
To have our PM and justice minister now criticize the process we have used for decades because the result proves emotionally challenging smacks of politics. Perhaps instead of criticizing the process and jurors’ decisions, our leaders should pull together teams of former jurors and ask them for ideas about changing the process. I can tell you, they would have a few. Neal St. Jacques, Toronto Re Tories critical of Trudeau’s response to shoot
ing acquittal, Feb. 12 I am confident that had the prime minister rather than the Conservative justice critic said of the Stanley acquittal; “We need to let the many steps of an independent judicial process unfold without political interference,” Conservative deputy leader Lisa Raitt would still have questioned “whether the prime minister and justice minister were implying that the jury arrived at the wrong verdict.”
Regardless, our political leaders should be aware that we, the people, believe the decision should be appealed forthwith, and wonder why you are all just skating around the issue rather than doing something about it. Louis Desjardins, Belleville The public should be very reluctant to criticize the jury for acquitting Gerald Stanley on the charge of second-degree murder, but should be very vocal about the fact he appears to be walking away completely free.
If the tables were turned and Mr. Stanley’s son had been killed in a similar incident in an Indigenous community, would the person in control of the gun have been treated so leniently? That is hard to believe.
The prime minister is right, therefore, to acknowledge that our judicial system is unbalanced and that his government has a duty to address the matter.
It is doubtful that changes to the rules for peremptory challenges, even if such changes are needed, would be a sufficient correction. A jury comprised of three Indigenous members and nine others likely would have arrived at the same verdict on the charge of murder.
Nevertheless, it appears that Mr. Stanley is the beneficiary of very favourable administrative decisions taken long before the jury was empanelled. Canadi- ans deserve to know what aspects of our legal system made those decisions possible so they can decide for themselves if those decisions were justifiable.
Finally, it must be noted with great admiration that the response by the Boushie family to the outcome of this legal process has been very measured, peaceful and respectful, and it is to be hoped that, one day, Canada will earn that respect. Patrick Cowan, North York Re ‘We’re going to fight back’ — Colten Boushie’s mother delivers emotional
message, Feb. 10 It is disgraceful to our commonly accepted Canadian values that such an obvious act of racism can exist. I feel the outrage displayed by the protesters is completely justified.
This entire case has a To Kill a Mockingbird feel to it, where any rational person can see that the trial was unfair and biased. Look no further than the jury, which was devoid of any Indigenous members, and the defence that was provided. It’s difficult to imagine that Gerald Stanley’s gun went off three times by accident. Abdullah Siddiqee, Ajax This jury verdict is another blatant example of Canada’s systemically racist justice system. The system needs radical surgery, not just liberal reformist tinkering such as abolishing the pre-emptory jury challenge.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s words of concern for the Boushie family are just another token gesture of concern, like former PM Stephen Harper’s Parliamentary apology for the Canadian government’s incompetent and intentional inaction on the many urgent recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
My heart, support and solidarity are with the Boushie family and all Indigenous people during their time of grief, rage and national protest. Don Weitz, Toronto We should all be outraged and ashamed. A jury of descendants of European settlers acquits one of their own. Anyone not offended or surprised by this verdict needs to take a long and serious honest look at the origin of bigotry inherent in this colony. Ted Turner, Toronto It is tragic that a young man has been killed when he had his whole life before him. It is a shame that the jury did not include peers from among the many First Nations.
But the 12 jurors found the accused not guilty. These people sought the truth. It is an exhausting process for any jury. Most of the outrage and protestations are from people who were not present in the courtroom.
Farmers have a right to defend themselves and their property from marauding outsiders. These guys were up to no good. Did an accident happen? I only know one thing: 12 ordinary people heard all the evidence and concluded it was not murder. The scenario was toxic. The result was tragic. It didn’t have to happen.
It would be a precedent to order a retrial based on public outrage. But it would also be a good idea, with Indigenous people making up half the jury. There will be no rest for Boushie’s family unless it is redone. The truth will prevail. Hugh McKechnie, Newmarket