Quote:
Originally Posted by esquire
But even then, would it have changed anything? Who knows how the jury came down on this. Would Indigenous jurors have found Stanley guilty? If so, why? It was a complicated case and I don't think it would have been a slam-dunk for the crown even with a full slate of Indigenous jurors. The facts are the facts.
|
To me this requiring a certain racial make-up of a jury is just a
little bit concerning.
The argument that is currently being made to suggest more indigenous jurors should have been present in the Stanley trial would seem to suggest that he wouldn't have "got away with it". But that assumes that simply being indigenous juror means that you will "support your own", regardless of the evidence. Maybe I am reading this all wrong, but it all leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
Would the Boushie family have been more supportive of the outcome if one or two of the jurors were Indigenous? I seriously doubt it.
Threaded Mode