When the verdict of “not guilty” came down over the weekend in the Gerald Stanley trial, the news flashed across Saskatchewan and across Canada, and the emotions the verdict evoked are strong on both sides.
Those who support Stanley point out the facts of the trial, including his reaction to a group of youths trespassing on his farm, and his claim that his gun accidentally discharged. In support of the victim, Colten Boushie, a 22-year-old from the Red Pheasant First Nation, the claim has been made of the unfairness of the all-white jury, and the unfairness of the verdict on the charge of second-degree murder.
There were many factors that resulted in the not-guilty verdict, and it does not help matters to have claims of bias or of racism, when the jury’s verdict has to be based on the facts of the case, and the forensic evidence. Did race enter the picture at all? Only the members of the jury could say for certain. The legal questions of this case should not consider race at all, but whether a land-owner could or should defend his property.
The polarization that has emerged in the wake of the verdict has lit up Facebook pages along with every form of social media, with extremely strong and pointed views from all sides firing at one another.
Politicians have weighed in, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaking about how, as Canadians, we need to do better, particularly in how jury trials are administered, and he met privately with Boushie’s family in Ottawa to hear their complaints and views on how the trial went.
The extremist views being loudly proclaimed have prompted some leaders, like Premier Scott Moe, to issue a call for calmness, and apparently the RCMP have been looking into some of those comments posted online.
If there is any possibility or need for the jury system to be reviewed, the first and most important thing is that no politicians should be involved in that process.
The judiciary has to be independent of political influence, and the prime minister should have known better than to even comment on how this trial came out, considering he is the leader of the country.
Legal representatives have pointed out that for the PM to make these comments, he is calling into question the very integrity of the courts and of juries, and this is not for him to do. If there are appeals to be made, or reviews of the process involved, the judiciary is the only proper body to take on that task, if it’s needed at all. — Greg Nikkel
