top of page
Search
Writer's pictureMisha Abdul Matin

Case Brief: R v. Pickton


R. v. Pickton, 2010 SCC 32, [2010] 2 S.C.R. 198

Misha Abdul Matin

LSOU Publications

October 16, 2023


Terms:


First-Degree Murder:

Those who are charged with first-degree murder meet these requirements:

  1. The victim was killed by means of an unlawful act.

  2. The victim was killed at the time and place noted in the indictment.

  3. The accused is the one who killed the victim.

  4. The accused meant to cause death of the victim or cause bodily harm that was likely to cause death.

  5. The death was premeditated


Second-Degree Murder:

Murder that is not first-degree murder, is second-degree murder.


Background

Robert William Pickton was born in 1949 on his family’s pig farm in Port Coquitlam, BC. By 1996, he partnered with his brother to turn the pig farm into ‘Piggy’s Palace Good Times Society’ and register it as a charity. They raised funds for groups in need through regularly scheduled parties. Bikers and sex trade workers from Downtown Eastside were regulars at these parties. Till the year 2000, when the city shut the charity down due to a rise in noise complaints.


Missing Women in Downtown Eastside

Between 1978 and 2001, 65 women were reported missing from Downtown Eastside. The majority of those missing were sex workers and indigenous women. The disappearances went ignored for far too long as these women belonged to communities that the police force held strong prejudice against. Meanwhile, members of the community did their best to protect these women. One method was to record the licence plate of cars that took in sex workers, to report in case they’d never return. Regardless, women continued to disappear.


Evidence

In February 2002, an old employee of the pig farm reported illegal guns in Pickton’s home to the RCMP. The police got hold of a search warrant and entered his home. On the site, they had found unregistered and illegal guns, dismembered women in buckets and garbage pails, and DNA samples belonging to 27 missing women. Pickton was arrested right then, with 27 murder charges laid against him. He was held in a cell with an undercover RCMP officer, to whom he confessed that he’d actually murdered 49 women, and was hoping to reach 50 before he’d been caught. This had become Canada's largest crime scene as 200,000 DNA samples had been collected, and $70 million had been spent on the investigation.


Procedural Posture

Robert Pickton was charged with 27 counts of first-degree murder. However, in the pre-trial rulings, the judge had severed 21 of the charges. This is because the prosecution felt there was sufficient evidence to convict Pickton with the remaining charges. This meant that the trial would proceed on the charge of six counts of first-degree murder. In the end, Pickton was found guilty of six counts of second-degree murder as there was no evidence to prove the murders were premeditated. Pickton appealed on the grounds that his trial was unfair due to misleading instructions presented throughout the trial. The appeal was dismissed.


On Appeal to the Court of Appeal for British Columbia

The crown held the position that the accused had been the sole perpetrator in killing the women. The defence took the position that the crown had failed to prove that no one else had been involved. On the fourth day of instructions to the jury, the trial judge stated these instructions to the jury on the elements of first-degree murder:

“A person commits an offence if he, alone or along with somebody else or others, personally does everything necessary to constitute the offence. Accordingly, it is not necessary for you to find that Mr. Pickton acted alone in order to find him guilty of the offence. You may find that Mr. Pickton acted in concert with other persons, although you may not know who they are. It is sufficient if you are satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt, having considered all the evidence, that he actively participated in the killing of the victim. It is not sufficient that he was merely present or took a minor role. The issue for you to decide is whether you are satisfied that it has been proven that he was involved to the extent that the law requires [to] establish his criminal liability.”


On the sixth day of deliberations, the trial judge had been asked to re-instruct the jury and he had stated the actual shooter instructions:


If you find that Mr. Pickton shot [name of victim], you should find that the Crown has proven [element 3, the identity of the killer]. On the other hand, if you have a reasonable doubt about whether or not he shot her, you must return a verdict of not guilty on the charge of murdering her. [Emphasis added.]


The difference here is that the judge had stated that the jury could also find the accused was the killer if he was “otherwise an active participant” in the killings. In the end, the jury stated the accused had been guilty of six counts of second-degree murder. Pickton then appealed his convictions, arguing that the change in instructions given so late in the trial was a deliberate miscarriage of justice.


Response to the Appeal:

While errors had occurred in the deliverance of instructions at the beginning and end of the trial, these seem irrelevant, as it is unlikely that they had any impact on the verdict. Thus, such errors were not serious errors. One must look to the trial as a whole to understand the reasoning behind this view. The trial had taken about a year, during which, compelling, and overwhelming evidence was presented to prove Pickton’s participation in the murders. Thus, it is not believable that a properly instructed jury would have found him to be innocent when faced with such evidence. This trial was a fair one, despite the errors in the provided instructions. Pickton received the same measure of justice as anyone else in this country,and is entitled to no more.


Conclusion:

The Appeal was Dismissed. By December 9, Pickton was found guilty of six counts of second-degree murder, and sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for 25 years.


Implications:

R v. Pickton brought attention to the unjust law enforcement practices in cases involving missing and murdered women, particularly indigenous women. This led to calls for reform in such law enforcement practices, to better support and protect marginalised communities. For example, in December of 2012, the Missing Women Commission of Inquiry issued 63 recommendations to law enforcement. Following the inquiry, the Vancouver Police Department implemented policy and procedural changes to investigations involving missing persons. The following are a few of these changes.

1) The unit responsible for missing-persons was made a regular part of the police department.

2) All investigations begin without a delay.

3) Family members are regularly notified, and consulted before the release of information.

4) A case file is kept open until the missing person is found.










Work Cited :


Branch, Legislative Services. “Consolidated Federal Laws of Canada, Criminal Code.” Criminal Code, September 28, 2023. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/page-34.html#h-119808.


Butts, Edward , and Andrew McIntosh. "Robert Pickton Case (Plain-Language Summary)." The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Article published January 26, 2023; Last Edited January 26, 2023.


Butts, Edward. "Robert Pickton Case." The Canadian Encyclopedia. Historica Canada. Article published July 26, 2016; Last Edited April 24, 2017.


CBC/Radio Canada. (2016, November 1). Pickton trial timeline | CBC news. CBCnews. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/pickton-trial-timeline-1.927418

R. V. Pickton - SCC cases. Accessed October 13, 2023. https://decisions.scc-csc.ca/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7872/index.do?site_preference=normal&&alternatelocale=en.

R. V. Pickton - SCC cases. Accessed October 13, 2023. https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7872/index.do.



47 views0 comments

Komentáře


bottom of page