Not guilty plea in slain toddler case

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 13/02/2018 (2938 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

As a national debate surges about how juries are selected, an Indigenous man in a high-profile Manitoba homicide case will be tried by a jury composed mainly of white, middle-aged men.

A Peguis First Nation father has pleaded not guilty to causing the death of his toddler daughter, as jurors who will decide the case promised Monday to keep an open mind, despite what they may have already heard about the little girl’s death.

Daniel Williams, 37, entered his not guilty plea to manslaughter in the Court of Queen’s Bench and watched as a pool of potential jurors was narrowed down to 14 — a 12-member jury of three women and nine men, along with two male alternate jurors — the majority of whom appeared to be Caucasian.

The case doesn’t share similarities with that of 56-year-old Saskatchewan farmer Gerald Stanley, acquitted last week in the shooting death of 22-year-old Colten Boushie, but it sheds some light on how juries are selected for high-profile cases in Manitoba, as public reaction to Stanley’s case propels the debate forward across Canada. Jurors in Stanley’s case appeared to be all white.

Manitoba Justice has said it doesn’t ask potential jurors their ethnicity, nor does it collect statistics on demographics of juries in the province, which means there are no data on how representative juries are for Indigenous people.

In 1991, Manitoba’s Aboriginal Justice Inquiry report recommended the jury selection process, which relies on provincial health card data, be made fairer and more inclusive for Indigenous jurors. It recognized Indigenous people have long been excluded from jury selection and suggested changes to increase participation.

Some of those recommendations were echoed by retired Supreme Court justice Frank Iacobucci in his 2013 report on First Nations people’s involvement on Ontario juries. But in the past 27 years, there’s been no change.

Williams is accused of not providing the necessaries of life to his 21-month-old daughter, Kierra Elektra Star Williams, leading to her death July 17, 2014, when she was rushed to hospital in a malnourished, neglected and battered state.

The high-profile nature of the case played into the jury selection process Monday, as some potential jurors were turned away because they weren’t sure they could be impartial about a case involving the death of a child.

One man was excused by Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Sadie Bond as soon as he told her he didn’t think he could fairly judge the case because he’s a father to young children. Other potential jurors were dismissed by their own peers who were appointed as “triers,” to determine who could keep an open mind.

At the request of defence lawyer Greg Brodsky, each potential juror was questioned about their previous knowledge of the case during an extra step in the jury selection process, that aimed to weed out those who may have been biased because of what they already believed about Kierra’s death.

As Bond questioned the potential jurors about whether their previous knowledge of the case would get in the way of their duties as a juror, two women who had been part of the jury selection pool were tasked with determining whether the person answered the judge’s questions acceptably. If not, they were immediately dismissed.

Bond asked each potential juror if they had seen or heard anything about the case in news coverage, on social media or from any other source. If they answered yes, Bond asked if they would be able to judge the case based on the evidence that will be presented in court, despite what they had previously seen or heard, “without bias, sympathy or prejudice.”

“That’s difficult to say,” replied one man, who appeared to be Indigenous. He wore his hair in a long, black braid and displayed a cultural symbol around his neck. He was dismissed.

Another man, who appeared to be Caucasian, was dismissed after he said he had “both sympathy and prejudice somewhat” about the case.

Only once the potential jurors were deemed impartial were they asked to look the accused in the eye. That’s when the Crown and defence lawyers have the opportunity to use their peremptory challenges.

Both sides have a certain number of challenges they can use to dismiss a potential juror, without having to give a reason. Many of the prospective jurors challenged by the defence in this case were women.

The Crown also used one of its challenges on a woman who appeared to smile slightly when she turned to look at the accused.

The jury is set to begin hearing evidence in Williams’ manslaughter case today.

katie.may@freepress.mb.caTwitter: @thatkatiemay