Evidence of meeting #76 for Justice and Human Rights in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was trial.
A video is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. It is a pleasure to welcome our panel of witnesses as we commence our committee study into the jury process in Canada.
I'm very glad to welcome Mr. Sikand, who's joining us today.
Welcome.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
I'm also very glad to welcome Mr. Rankin, who's joining us today, as Mr. Rankin was instrumental in introducing many of us to some of the jurors who first raised this issue and talked about the need, which all parties agreed with, for this issue to be studied. It's something that is obviously very serious, people serving the public on juries, who come out of the process feeling that they were not supported by the government in the way that they should be. We're really glad to hear about each of your individual experiences. I know those will guide us going forward in terms of our committee's deliberations.
I would like to welcome today, appearing as individuals, Mr. Mark Farrant, Mr. Patrick Fleming, Ms. Tina Daenzer, and Mr. Scott Glew.
Welcome.
We will be going in the order that the witnesses are sitting in, so we will start with Mr. Farrant.
Mr. Farrant, the floor is yours.
3:35 p.m.
Mark Farrant As an Individual
Thank you very much.
Thank you to the members of this committee for inviting me to speak here today and for unanimously agreeing to open this study of juror mental health. If I may, I will also remark on the eloquence and sensitivity that each member expressed during your discussions and the vote that brought us here today.
Jury duty is one of the most important civic responsibilities expected of Canadian citizens. Indeed, it is likely the last mandatory service remaining since the abolishment of military conscription. However, I think it is fair to say that Canadians have a conflicted relationship with jury duty. Many see it as an inconvenience, a burden, and a major disruption, rather than accepting the important responsibility that it is.
In January 2014, I was selected as a juror in a first-degree murder trial in Toronto, Ontario. Like a lot of Canadians, I had no experience with the criminal justice system prior to the events of 2014, nor had I even really been in a courtroom. I served as foreman in the deliberations and ultimately delivered the verdict in court.
The trial involved the graphic murder of a young woman, Carina Petrache, by her on-again, off-again boyfriend. She was attacked one morning in the rooming house apartment they shared. Her throat was cut from ear to ear. She was stabbed 25 times and was ultimately set on fire as her murderer attempted to set fire to the basement unit in a vain attempt to bring the building down in flames. His arson efforts failed, and Carina, mortally wounded, was able to vacate the unit, only to die of her massive injuries en route to hospital.
The accused also suffered horrible wounds stemming from the fire, suffering burns to 90% of his body, leaving him grossly facially disfigured and disabled due to amputations. He spent 12 months in a medical coma before being charged. In the courtroom, he was a living ghoul, a reminder of the brutality of the attack, and he spent many hours staring down jurors in an attempt to intimidate and shock.
The trial lasted four months and was made complicated by an NCR defence, which is known as “not criminally responsible”. Hours of testimony from the coroner detailed the graphic murder, including dozens of autopsy photos of the victim, descriptions of her significant and superficial wounds, and articulation of the defensive wounds on hands and feet, which suggested that the assault was excessively violent and unrelenting.
The macabre police video provided a walk-through of the crime scene by moving about the burned basement unit where the assault took place, moving up the burned stairwell, and following a trail of the blood of the deceased, complete with blood splatters, bloody handprints and footprints, and pools of blood up and down the hallway and in the bathroom. Testimony from the fire and emergency response officers on the scene was harrowing and disturbing, especially the testimony of a seasoned fire captain who broke down on the stand, stating that this was the worst thing he'd ever had to endure.
The accused was ultimately found guilty of second-degree murder. The accused later hanged himself in the Toronto West Detention Centre prior to receiving his sentence.
In court as a juror, I took all the evidence in silently, as was my role. As jurors, we ingest the evidence and the facts. We do not interact with it. We are not afforded an opportunity to look away or raise our hands and say to the courtroom,“Turn that off; I've had enough.”
I remember a particularly brutal image being left on our screen during closing arguments for 45 minutes and wondering why this was even necessary. This image was not in any way going to influence my decision-making. At the time, I understood that any stress or sleeplessness and anxiety was my burden to bear in this particular role as a juror. It's part of the job, I reminded myself.
As a juror, you are extremely isolated. You cannot communicate with anyone in any form about the events in court or even really with other jurors. I would leave the court in a trance, not remembering even how I got home. I would stare blankly into space during meetings at work or at home while my three-year old daughter tried desperately to engage with me. My then pregnant wife, who had such an engaged husband during her first pregnancy, now had an emotional zombie in me, unable or unwilling to communicate.
I expected these feelings to subside as I left the courthouse on the day the verdict was delivered. I expected to experience a period of re-acclimatization as I re-entered my life, and then I would be fine. I expected that there would be a thorough discharge and debrief prior to being dismissed, and that perhaps a counsellor would be present who could direct us to services or mental exercises, or indeed talk to us. There was nothing.
My feelings didn't subside. They intensified and deepened. After the trial, I cut off communication with all friends and family, only interacting with colleagues at work, and then only superficially. I became hypervigilant around my kids, refusing to let them walk alone, even a few steps in front of me. I became unable to handle crowds and public spaces. My diet changed. I was unable to look at and prepare raw meat without gagging, something that persists to this day.
Images would haunt me day after day, an unrelenting bombardment of horror. My daughter's red finger painting would hurtle me back to the scene of the crime and I would stare transfixed, seemingly out of space and time. Sometimes I would just start to cry for no reason at all. Intimacy with my spouse was impossible, and I found myself either sleeping downstairs on some kind of vigil, or sleeping in my children's rooms at the foot of their doors, if I even slept at all.
I began to see everything as a potential threat, and even began arming myself with knives “just in case”, I would say to myself, as I would take my children to the park to play. My daughter asked me one day why I was putting a knife in my jacket and I struggled to understand, even myself, why I was doing it, let alone to explain it to a three-year-old. I knew something was horribly wrong with me.
Finally, my family intervened and said that I was ill and I needed to seek help. The first place I turned to was the courthouse, thinking that they would have immediate access to counsellors and services for jurors as a matter of course. I was surprised when my repeated calls went unanswered and finally learned that there were no services from the courts available to me unless they had been issued by a judge. This was the policy in Ontario at the time. Victim services were also not available because, of course, I was not a victim.
So began the dizzying fall into the public health system where it became my responsibility to find a clinician and to be put on a waiting list for psychiatric services, which was almost a year long.
Finally, after almost six months I found a clinic specializing in PTSD, which was my diagnosis, and began paying out of pocket for treatment for cognitive behavioural therapy with a psychologist. Grateful for the treatment, I began thinking that (a) I shouldn't have to be looking for counselling, and (b) that jurors should receive some treatment after serving in difficult trials as part of their service to the community and the country. Jurors should not have to suffer as a result of their civic duty.
I was motivated to do something about it, which began a very long and determined advocacy, resulting in the Ontario Government launching the juror support program, a toll-free crisis line and eight counselling sessions.
I wrote to every attorney general across the country, asking them to adopt a similar program or amend the barriers in the existing programs to match what Ontario had. I was met with resistance, or completely ignored in most cases. Yet I heard from countless jurors from across the country who shared similar experiences and who spoke of the woeful lack of mental health support in their provinces. Some of those jurors had been ill for many years and remain affected to this day.
I was determined to seek a federal standard, which brings us here today. Members of the committee, I want to let you know that treatment works. It's the reason I am sitting here now and talking to you. It works. I'm living proof of that.
Jurors are an important pillar of the justice system. I once said that jurors and first responders are bookends of that system. Jurors close the cases in trial that police and first responders initially answer. We see the same evidence, if not more, and we are all affected by the same horror and tragedy, yet one group receives treatment and support and the other does not.
I hope you will return a recommendation to the government and the justice minister that underscores the critical role jurors play in our justice system, and provide them with the support they deserve to return to their lives.
Thank you, committee.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you very much.
Just before the rest of you speak, and to you, Mark, I just want to thank you for sharing your personal story with us because I know how difficult it is, but I think it's only by our hearing that from you and other jurors that we'll get a full understanding and comprehension of the problem, and that will allow us to formulate the right solutions, so thank you.
3:45 p.m.
Patrick Fleming As an Individual
Good afternoon.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
I am Patrick Fleming, and I served as a juror three years ago in a first-degree murder trial that consumed my life for ten months and beyond. The case, R. v. Pan, involved a young woman, Jennifer Pan, from Markham, Ontario, and four accomplices hired to kill Jennifer’s parents in their family home. I live with daily thoughts of this crime: graphic coroner's photos of bullet holes through flesh, the bloody crime scene, and chilling testimonies. As the foreman, I can still hear and see myself reading the guilty verdict to all the accused. I can still hear the screams of the family and friends of the accused in a packed courtroom as I read their verdicts. When my civic duty was done and I was able to go home to my family and return to my “normal” life I pulled into my driveway and expected feelings of relief to wash over me, but something was different. I did not feel at my place of peace. Something was not right.
This experience made me feel alone. I felt isolated, although I was surrounded by my loved ones. I pulled away from my wife, my family, and my friends, during and after this trial. I could not put into words what I was going through emotionally. I had many confused feelings, thoughts, and horrific visions, during and after this trial. I had to prepare myself to return to my place of work the next day after being away for ten long months. I knew I was in need of help but at that time the courts did not offer any assistance, just a thank you for my civic duty and goodbye. I so desperately needed to talk to a professional, someone who could help me work through my feelings and thoughts. I cannot emphasize enough how strongly I feel that all civilians who are chosen to be a juror should be offered mental health support after a trial has ended.
We need assistance getting back to our “normal” life. We are civilians who did not choose this path for ourselves nor are we trained to deal with this type of situation. Being a juror is a monumental job that has had a major impact on my life. I strongly feel that there is a federal responsibility to provide professional assistance to all jurors, in all provinces. I still endorse and believe that one should do their civic duty but one should not pay out of pocket, as I have, to have access to mental health support for doing their part for their country.
I know an individual who has used the Ontario support program for jurors, and he is very grateful that Ontario offers such a program. It has helped him and his family tremendously, and he has asked me today to thank the government for providing that help and support that he needed.
I have also added two pages of bullet points that summarize some of my experiences of the stress of jury duty. I felt isolated from my family and friends. I would distance myself, and I could not share what I was going through. I had overwhelming feelings of guilt from making such a life-altering decision about the defendants' lives. I felt guilty for not being present for my family emotionally and physically. Feelings of loneliness throughout and after the trial are still hard to manage. I had a hard time trying to push down my emotions. I could not feel empathy or sympathy for these victims. I had to be analytical; I had to deal with only the facts of the case, not the emotions. I accomplished this, but I was left dealing with my own emotions by myself.
Again, I want to thank the committee for inviting me here today and thank all of the members of Parliament who have endorsed our advocacy.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
November 22nd, 2017 / 3:45 p.m.
Tina Daenzer As an Individual
Thank you to the committee for allowing me to appear before you today.
I am a first-generation immigrant and extremely proud to be a Canadian citizen. I have the privileges and rights and freedoms this country offers, but with those rights come responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is to participate in helping to bring about justice when summoned to do so. Our right to trial by jury depends on the willingness of all citizens to serve, but doing so should not be at the expense of a juror's own mental health.
In 1995, I was the first juror selected for the Paul Bernardo trial. Justice Patrick LeSage advised me the trial would be difficult and there would be graphic material presented as evidence. At that moment I had no way to fully comprehend how bad it would be. Imagine watching young girls being raped and tortured over and over again. You couldn't close your eyes and you couldn't look away because your duty was to watch the evidence. Many days I would go home in a fog, as if heavily medicated. I counted on my husband to care for our children and to assume most household responsibilities as I often had difficulty focusing on tasks after a day in court. Most nights the videos would play in my head over and over again. I had difficulty sleeping. Intimacy with my husband became nonexistent for a long time, even after the trial ended. I became afraid to go outside after dark, and to this day that still affects me. I have extreme distrust of strangers.
At one point during the trial, Justice LeSage had to call a recess on my behalf as I was having severe palpitations due to stress. Yet I was one of the lucky ones. In his 29 years as a judge, Patrick LeSage ordered or recommended counselling for jurors on only two occasions, and the Bernardo trial was one of them. He himself sought counselling after the trial ended. Since I was diagnosed as having PTSD, the counsellor advised services were available to me as long as I required them. While time is a great healer, having access to counselling helped me manage the trauma and anxiety and get back to living my life.
At the time I assumed counselling was provided automatically to jurors in traumatic trials. I came to realize this was not the case when I started reading about Mark Farrant and his mission to ensure that all jurors would be eligible for post-trial support. If it is our duty as citizens to take part in the jury system, then it must be the duty of the courts and the government to ensure that no harm comes to those willing to serve.
Thank you kindly for your time today. I hope the committee will make a strong recommendation to the government and justice minister that a national standard for jury mental health and counselling is necessary, and that all provinces are required to meet that standard.
3:50 p.m.
Scott Glew As an Individual
Thank you.
Honourable members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to speak today as a witness.
I'm a 47-year-old male, who lives in the GTA. I served as a juror on a second-degree murder trial of a two-and-a-half-year-old boy. The trial was approximately six weeks long and included the sequestering of the jury.
Forgive me.
3:50 p.m.
Liberal
3:50 p.m.
As an Individual
The case involved the death of a two-and-a-half-year-old boy who was under the care of his mother's boyfriend. According to the pathologist, the boy had sustained several serious injuries, including cracked vertebrae, broken bones, and blunt force trauma to the abdomen. These injuries were sustained in the weeks leading up the boy's death.
I know this because I had to sit through an extensive autopsy report with graphic images of the crime scene, and how it was determined throughout the investigative process, specifically the autopsy process.
The trial hit home for me as at the time of the trial I had a two-and-a-half-year-old boy at home. The thought that somebody could do this to a precious child obviously still disturbs me.
The accused was convicted, and to this day I can still hear the cries of the courtroom, the victim's grandfather in tears, reaching over the pews crying, “Thank you, thank you.” The courtroom security abruptly ushered us, the jurors, away from the courtroom, and snuck us out the back tunnel of the courthouse. This was done for our own safety as a riot had broken out in front of the courthouse between family members of the convicted and the victim. I found out about this after I got home and saw it on the news.
Returning to work was difficult. My employer was not very sympathetic to me being away for six weeks, even though I went to work before and after the trial as well as on weekends to try to keep up. It was budget time and everything was due immediately. The culture of this employer was that financial deadlines and commitments were paramount over any other work that had to be done.
My first day back was a fog. It was very strange to me that one day I was sequestered away from my normal life and family, deciding the fate of an individual, attempting to attain justice, and the next day I was in a boardroom meeting about a new computer software program that my employer was implementing.
Within days of the trial, I knew I needed support from a mental health professional. I sought out an EAP program counsellor. She was tremendous. I was fortunate that my employer offered such a program. The follow-up from the trial ultimately led me to leave my employer. The treatment I received—the lack of understanding from my superiors, peers, and upper management—made me feel that I had done something wrong, like I was on vacation or not living up to my job requirements.
I was lucky to have the support of an EAP program and a great counsellor. In time, I came to the realization that I needed to move on from this employer. Personally, the counselling led me down some paths of my own life that I would not have explored without it. These were positive changes and awakenings to my own behaviour.
To this day, I worry all the time that something will happen to my kids, that someone in their life will hurt them the way the victim was hurt. I am super vigilant and accused of being way too overprotective, but knowing what I know, I cannot be too careful with who looks after my kids.
I would do my civic duty again. I believe the justice system in Canada is truly one of the best in the world. I witnessed first-hand the rights of the accused, the judge's constant assurance that the accused should receive a fair and unbiased trial.
Even the best judicial system system in the world can be improved upon. Making post-trial support available for all jurors who need it would close the loop in the jury trial system. Having an extended period of time after the trial to normalize before returning to work would greatly help as well. Creating a robust education package for employers and potentially co-workers of jurors might help as well. Having separate parking areas, break areas, away from the lawyers, families and participants in the trial would also help.
I would like to re-emphasize and encourage you to make post-trial support standard nationwide, to provide help to those who need it, to those who are the backbone of the jury system. It would certainly make it much easier for them to cope with the outcomes, facts, and images they endure to perform their civic duty.
Thank you for your time.
I am honoured to have participated in this process, and I apologize for the emotions.
3:55 p.m.
Liberal
The Chair Liberal Anthony Housefather
Thank you very much.
The emotions are an important part of why we're here today. Again, it's only by truly hearing what you've gone through that we are able, in our own heads, to feel that we understand the experience.
We're now going to go to questions. We'll do one official round and then we'll take questions from everybody.
We'll start with the Conservatives.
Mr. Nicholson.
3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Thank you very much.
I've been a member of this committee for the last couple of years. I've been involved with the justice committee for close to 20 years of my political career, and this is one of the most moving testimonies I have heard.
I want you to know that I truly believe that your testimony and what you are doing will make a difference.
Mr. Glew, you said we have the best judicial system in the world, but it can be improved, and this is a gap in the judicial system that definitely needs to be improved at all different levels. One of the reasons I have been so interested in this is that we can contribute to what you, and those working with you, have done. You have identified something that I don't remember being identified before. Your first-hand experience and the first-hand experience of all of you will be invaluable.
Mr. Farrant, you said you wrote to the Ontario government, and then they came up with this program to provide some assistance. You said you wrote to other attorneys general and governments across this country. Some of them replied to you; others didn't.
I don't want to put any pressure on you, but it would be interesting for us to know if you could give us copies of what they said to you. We now want to be involved with this business, and I would be very interested to hear what those different provinces or territories said, or did not say, to you. This underscores the challenges we have on this question. Do you have any comment on that?
4 p.m.
As an Individual
I would be happy to share any and all of my correspondence with those attorneys general and ministries. Some of the responses were that they hadn't heard from any jurors who complained, so they didn't think they had a problem in that province. I heard from jurors within that province who said they had been on a horrible trial and experienced no support, and that was 10 years ago.
I have heard provinces say that it would be costly and that they were concerned about the undue financial burden on the taxpayer this program might incur. I would always say that it's not about the cost of the program but about the cost of the lives we save as a result of the program being put in place. Prior to the program being introduced in Ontario, a juror in London, Ontario, took her life after a case involving the homicide of a child went to mistrial. If a program had been in place prior to that event, I'm certain that this person might have been saved.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
When you got a letter back from one of the attorneys general about the possible cost, was there any mention in that letter of the cost jurors have to absorb?
4 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
Would you agree with me that part of our neglect of the interests of jurors is demonstrated by the lack of compensation we give them? You go for a couple of weeks with zero, and then they send you a message saying you get $40 a day.
People like you made it very clear that you do this out of a public duty to serve. Don't you feel you're getting the wrong message, though, when the government tells you that you can be there for two weeks and your employer doesn't have to pay you? Then they reward you with $40 a day.
4 p.m.
As an Individual
In Ontario, the employer is not obligated to pay for your time away from work. They're obligated to maintain your job. However, we've heard from jurors—and I am one of them—that the employer often feels incredibly put out, and there's a lot of pressure on you as a juror to continue to work on top of doing that civic duty.
I was one of those individuals who, after seeing horrific evidence, went back to the office, met with my team, worked for six hours, and then went back into the courtroom the very next day. While my employers gradually understood that I was going through something pretty harsh, the bottom line was that I was going to get the job done right, meaning the job I was employed to do.
Jury pay doesn't cover the costs of transportation and incidentals a juror has in a day of jury duty. If you're commuting from Pickering to the downtown Toronto courthouse and parking your car, that's absorbed. It's gone, and that's before you have to buy lunch.
4 p.m.
Conservative
Rob Nicholson Conservative Niagara Falls, ON
There's probably a message even there. In the criteria for compensation, they made it very clear that they won't provide anything for child care expenses here. I guess there's a certain message that's being sent out there. I wonder, in the short time I have, if the other three have any comment with respect to the questions I directed at Mr. Farrant.
4 p.m.
As an Individual
I would just say that you can see how much trouble the courts are having in actually getting jurors to want to participate. Not only does it take them away from their normal, everyday life, but, yes, there is no compensation for doing that, and they do it out of civic duty.
4:05 p.m.
As an Individual
I work in a place where many people are around me, a lot of employees, and when they get that summons, the first thing they do, because they know I've gone through this ordeal, is to come and ask me how they can get out of it. That's the first thing they say every time. I have to tell you, I say to them, why do you want to? Because I still endorse it, and they know what I've been through. I tell them that this is important; it's important for all Canadians to do. I say to them, if you were in trouble yourself, wouldn't you want your peers to overlook it? They just look at me like I'm nuts.
You're laughing, but honestly, that's the very first thing they say: how can I get out of this? We can change that attitude. I really think we can change this attitude, and with the government's help maybe we can reform the jury altogether. Maybe we can put up the wages a little bit, and make sure that the juror knows that there's support there for them. That's part of the problem. The first thing they worry about is their family, financially. Why don't we make it a little bit better for them and let them know that we'll help them pay for day care. Give them a little bit more money. In long cases maybe say, we'll give you a break, like a little vacation halfway through it. Let's make it a little bit better for us, the private individuals out here. We really do love our country. And—you know what?—we support our country. Our country just needs to support us. That's all we're asking for.
