Canadian Justice, Indigenous Injustice: The Gerald Stanley and Colten Boushie Case

by Kent Roach, John Borrows (Foreword)

In August 2016 Colten Boushie, a twenty-two-year-old Cree man from Red Pheasant First Nation, was fatally shot on a Saskatchewan farm by white farmer Gerald Stanley. In a trial that bitterly divided Canadians, Stanley was acquitted of both murder and manslaughter by a jury in Battleford with no visible Indigenous representation.

In Canadian Justice, Indigenous Injustice Kent Roach critically reconstructs the Gerald Stanley/Colten Boushie case to examine how it may be a miscarriage of justice. Roach provides historical, legal, political, and sociological background to the case including misunderstandings over crime when Treaty 6 was negotiated, the 1885 hanging of eight Indigenous men at Fort Battleford, the role of the RCMP, prior litigation over Indigenous underrepresentation on juries, and the racially charged debate about defence of property and rural crime. Drawing on both trial transcripts and research on miscarriages of justice, Roach looks at jury selection, the controversial “hang fire” defence, how the credibility and beliefs of Indigenous witnesses were challenged on the stand, and Gerald Stanley's implicit appeals to self-defence and defence of property, as well as the decision not to appeal the acquittal. Concluding his study, Roach asks whether Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's controversial call to “do better” is possible, given similar cases since Stanley's, the difficulty of reforming the jury or the RCMP, and the combination of Indigenous underrepresentation on juries and overrepresentation among those victimized and accused of crimes.

Informed and timely, Canadian Justice, Indigenous Injustice is a searing account of one case that provides valuable insight into criminal justice, racism, and the treatment of Indigenous peoples in Canada.

Genres: Nonfiction, Indigenous

319 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 21, 2019

Reviews

[Michael Nest · Rating 4 out of 5]

Most people who read this book will already know details of the case but - spoiler alert if you do not! - in August 2016, a young Cree man, Colten Bushie, was driving with four friends when their car developed a flat tire and they drove onto the farm of Gerald Stanley. Two of the friends drove off in one of Stanley’s vehicles before crashing a short distance later. Stanley grabbed a pistol and fired warning shots, prompting Bushie to get into the driver’s seat of his friends’ car to flee. What happened next is not in dispute: Stanley approached Bushie and held a gun behind his left ear, safety catch off; Bushie was shot point-blank. The case bitterly divided the community. Whites defended Stanley, claiming farmers were under siege; Indigenous people demanded a murder conviction; Stanley’s lawyers managed to block anyone visibly Indigenous from serving on the jury; Stanley was acquitted by the all-white jury of all charges, but given a fine for unsafe storage of firearms. After the verdict, some whites used social media to call for the murder of Indigenous people; Saskatchewan’s Premier called for calm. Roach analyzes the application of law during the trial, arguing that the Canadian legal system’s smugness and defensiveness prevent reforms that could deliver anything Indigenous people might view as justice. He does a great job of unpacking the law and how it is made, maintained and reformed, and Roach is to be congratulated for this cleared-eyed analysis. I understand he deliberately steered clear of interviewing the families involved because he wanted to maintain some kind of objectivity, but adding detail about how legal injustice against Indigenous people is manifested at the personal level would have made it a more compelling read. Still, every law student in Canada should read it! If you want the personal detail, see the documentary 'We Will Stand Up' by Tasha Hubbard, it's brilliant.

[Melissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not a huge fan of the writing style - dry and repetitive- but there was a lot to learn from this book. I appreciated the historical and contemporary context of racial and legal conflict in Saskatchewan. I also had not realized that our jury selection was so very different from the American system most of us are used to seeing on TV. Jurors are not asked anything to determine their biases, other than a super straightforward question like “Do you have any prejudices?” Peremptory challenges don’t have to be justified - they can be based entirely on appearance. So even though one could object that a challenge was discriminatory, since it’s arbitrary, this is hard to prove. Our system also may have evolved (thanks to Gladue) to take indigenous experience and history into account when dealing with defendants, but these same considerations are not applied to indigenous witnesses and victims. Justice isn’t blind. Not by a long shot.

[Justyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

I really enjoyed this book from front to back. After reading this story I have to say that I feel embarrassed to be of the same race as Gerald Stanley, because the killing of Colten Boushie was because of judgements made based on the color of his skin. Indigenous injustice is the truth. I love the talk of the various other similar cases that were brought up in this book. I'm happy I own this book so I can re-read this one again in a month or two. I will update my review once I do re-read. I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Great read! Check it out!

[Ryan Mann · Rating 4 out of 5]

An important book to read in these times, especially leading up to a federal election and with so much going on in the political climate. Some of the cases mentioned are horrifying, and told very matter-of-factly. However, I have to admit I only read less than 40% of the book simply because it was very long, written in long sentences, and organized technically.

[B.M. M. Polier · Rating 3 out of 5]

Given 3 starts because it's an extremely dry read and hard to get through, but would be 5 stars purely based on the importance of the discussion involved.

[Brandi · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good book, but the writing as a little repetitive.