The jury is being chosen this week to sit in judgment of six murder charges brought against Robert Pickton. The trial is expected to last up to a full year. The question is whether the jury can last that long?
When the trial begins there will be a panel of twelve. For the trial to be successfully completed, no more than two jurors can be dismissed. At least ten are needed to render a verdict.
Pickton is widely believed to have killed up to 26-prostitutes. Of these deaths, the Crown has chosen to proceed with six counts of first degree murder. Obviously 26 would be unmanageable but even six counts is a herculean task for a jury.
What is to be gained from six convictions rather than two or three? At the end of the day Pickton may be penalized but once. Life with no prospect of parole for 25-years. At his age that means, if convicted, Pickton probably won't live long enough even to apply for parole.
What then is gained by the extra three or four counts that have been brought? Closure for some families, of course. But, how do we give the same closure to the families of the 20-other victims? Is that even important?
Mega-trials like this have been attempted before but with mixed results. The risk of mistrial increases significantly at this scale. For what the Crown is trying to accomplish, are six counts really necessary or even prudent?
No comments:
Post a Comment