What do you think?
Rate this book
The Court of Better Fiction: Three Trials, Two Executions and Arctic Sovereignty
2020 Arthur Ellis Award, Best Nonfiction Crime Book ― Shortlisted
In its rush to establish dominion over the North, Canada executed two innocent Inuit.
In 1921, the RCMP arrested two Inuit males suspected of killing their uncle. While in custody, one of the accused allegedly killed a police officer and a Hudson's Bay Company trader.
The Canadian government hastily established an unprecedented court in the Arctic, but the trial quickly became a master class in judicial error. The verdicts were decided in Ottawa weeks before the court convened. Authorities were so certain of convictions, the executioner and gallows were sent north before the trial began. In order to win, the Crown broke many of its own laws.
The precedent established Canada’s legal relationship with the Inuit, who would spend the next seventy-seven years fighting to regain their autonomy and Indigenous rule of law.
In its rush to establish dominion over the North, Canada executed two innocent Inuit.
In 1921, the RCMP arrested two Inuit males suspected of killing their uncle. While in custody, one of the accused allegedly killed a police officer and a Hudson's Bay Company trader.
The Canadian government hastily established an unprecedented court in the Arctic, but the trial quickly became a master class in judicial error. The verdicts were decided in Ottawa weeks before the court convened. Authorities were so certain of convictions, the executioner and gallows were sent north before the trial began. In order to win, the Crown broke many of its own laws.
The precedent established Canada’s legal relationship with the Inuit, who would spend the next seventy-seven years fighting to regain their autonomy and Indigenous rule of law.
200 pages, Paperback
Published March 16, 2019
About the author
Debra Komar
6 books84 followersAfter twenty years as a practicing forensic scientist, I retired and began writing full time. My current books re-examine historical Canadian crimes using modern forensic methods.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews
July 9, 2021
Extensively researched and footnoted, but a bit dry and plodding.
Komar makes the point that the trial was biased and unfair, but seems to be applying current standards of fairness. I wanted to know more about the justice system in other sparsely populated areas of Canada in the 1920s— how did this trial compare to those? Was this one particularly unfair, or was it a creature of the times?
Komar really goes out on a limb with some of her justice system assertions. For example, she criticizes the fact that the jury was all white men. Yet at the time First Nations people did not even have the right to vote. I’m not suggesting the proceedings were fair in any way (just the opposite) but did happen in a colonial racist context that was framed as normal at the time. In that context, every jury trial was an outrage.
The author could also have benefited from consulting lawyers and not just archivists and anthropologists. For example, Komar tries to make the point the process was flawed because the prosecution advanced several theories about motive. Yet that very approach is still common among prosecutors and defence today — because they are not the triers of fact. The defence might say, for example, my client is innocent or at the most guilty of manslaughter. The prosecution says he’s guilty of murder, first degree or second degree or at the very least manslaughter. That’s 4 different theories based on very different assumptions regarding facts and motives, and that happens everyday in the criminal justice system in adversarial proceedings.
There were a number of instances of murky ethics. The two young Inuit were supposed to be “innocent" but did kill at least one person. That killing might have been acceptable in terms of the local culture, but does that make them “innocent”? This complicating issue was raised but not really explored.
Laypeople often confuse the difference between “not guilty” and “innocent”. They are not the same thing at all.
Komar makes the point that the trial was biased and unfair, but seems to be applying current standards of fairness. I wanted to know more about the justice system in other sparsely populated areas of Canada in the 1920s— how did this trial compare to those? Was this one particularly unfair, or was it a creature of the times?
Komar really goes out on a limb with some of her justice system assertions. For example, she criticizes the fact that the jury was all white men. Yet at the time First Nations people did not even have the right to vote. I’m not suggesting the proceedings were fair in any way (just the opposite) but did happen in a colonial racist context that was framed as normal at the time. In that context, every jury trial was an outrage.
The author could also have benefited from consulting lawyers and not just archivists and anthropologists. For example, Komar tries to make the point the process was flawed because the prosecution advanced several theories about motive. Yet that very approach is still common among prosecutors and defence today — because they are not the triers of fact. The defence might say, for example, my client is innocent or at the most guilty of manslaughter. The prosecution says he’s guilty of murder, first degree or second degree or at the very least manslaughter. That’s 4 different theories based on very different assumptions regarding facts and motives, and that happens everyday in the criminal justice system in adversarial proceedings.
There were a number of instances of murky ethics. The two young Inuit were supposed to be “innocent" but did kill at least one person. That killing might have been acceptable in terms of the local culture, but does that make them “innocent”? This complicating issue was raised but not really explored.
Laypeople often confuse the difference between “not guilty” and “innocent”. They are not the same thing at all.
March 29, 2019
A fascinating history of Canada and incompetence.Some great historical photographs.Debra Komar is a masterful historian and a superior writer.Her research is impeccable,there are as many pages of notes as there are in the story.Some interesting parallels between then and now.Governmental ,political,and judicial incompetence at its most startling.
January 27, 2019
Another excellent addition to Ms. Komar's body of work. Her legal and forensic background experiences are put to good use in defending wrongfully tried and executed Inuit men.
July 17, 2019
The Court of Better Fiction fell into my lap by way of a CBC article review and overview of the history explained in this book. As a sucker with a passion for Indigenous Canadian history, I immediately asked my library to order it in.
Komar chronicles the FACTS associated with a prominent series of murder trials that took place in the Arctic Circle in the early 1920s. She walks readers honestly through the murders, the perspectives shared at the time, possible* motives, and the political gains/exercise that existed behind executing trials of Inuit individuals in Canada.
My favorite thing about this book -- and one of the reasons why I strongly recommend it and give it five stars -- is that Komar reports the FACTS and the FACTS ONLY. The resource list and notes for this book are extensive; the research very well done. And, unlike most books that attempt to cover historical events, Komar does not let her opinion cloud the presentation of the history. What I mean by this is readers are not pressured into reading an analysis/interpretation of a series of events; they are presented with the facts and are able to make their own decisions for themselves.
Some may not agree with my comment and suggest that Komar's text can be coloured with her passion for the subject matter and/or her opinion of the events, but I would disagree. There were a few moments where I had this thought to myself, but with further reading, it was easily determined that this was information commonly "known" (shared within sources) and that was now being shared with me.
Excellent read. Very interesting. I learned a lot. I wish more books would be this straightforward and "to the facts". If Komar were to publish anything else, you can be assured I will jump on it.
Komar chronicles the FACTS associated with a prominent series of murder trials that took place in the Arctic Circle in the early 1920s. She walks readers honestly through the murders, the perspectives shared at the time, possible* motives, and the political gains/exercise that existed behind executing trials of Inuit individuals in Canada.
My favorite thing about this book -- and one of the reasons why I strongly recommend it and give it five stars -- is that Komar reports the FACTS and the FACTS ONLY. The resource list and notes for this book are extensive; the research very well done. And, unlike most books that attempt to cover historical events, Komar does not let her opinion cloud the presentation of the history. What I mean by this is readers are not pressured into reading an analysis/interpretation of a series of events; they are presented with the facts and are able to make their own decisions for themselves.
Some may not agree with my comment and suggest that Komar's text can be coloured with her passion for the subject matter and/or her opinion of the events, but I would disagree. There were a few moments where I had this thought to myself, but with further reading, it was easily determined that this was information commonly "known" (shared within sources) and that was now being shared with me.
Excellent read. Very interesting. I learned a lot. I wish more books would be this straightforward and "to the facts". If Komar were to publish anything else, you can be assured I will jump on it.
May 2, 2019
Impeccably researched account of one of Canada's most regrettable trials. Debra Komar is a great storyteller.
January 13, 2022
Enlightening! A blatant travesty of justice but even today we would not understand the cultural nuances.
May 1, 2019
Non-fiction story of the execution of two Canadian Inuit in 1923 and the incompetence of the justice system leading to their deaths. Well worth reading.
Displaying 1 - 7 of 7 reviews