Prospective jurors for the trial of Peter Khill, charged with second-degree murder for the death of a First Nations man were screened by lawyers for possible racial bias.
The potential jurors were asked whether or not the fact the accused was white and deceased victim was Indigenous would keep them from considering evidence without bias.
It's a question that wasn't asked of the reportedly all-white jurors who reached a not-guilty verdict for Saskatchewan farmer Gerald Stanley, accused of second-degree murder in a similar case about the death of Colten Boushie, and something one legal scholar described as a "good precaution."
"In my view this is a significant improvement that happened when the Stanley jury was selected," said Kent Roach, a law professor at the University of Toronto, when reached by phone.
While describing the case to the prospective jurors, Justice Stephen Glithero said it's alleged Khill woke up around 3 a.m. on Feb. 4, 2016 and went outside with a shotgun to confront a man he saw "in or near" his truck.
The victim was 29-year-old Styres, a member of the Six Nations of the Grand River, who police say died at the scene of "gunshot-related injuries."
Khill, 28, told court Monday he's pleading not guilty to the charge.
Glithero addressed approximately 250 prospective jurors who crowded into a Hamilton courtroom, filling the seats and standing three-deep in the aisles.
Throughout the day that group was whittled down to 14 people. Twelve will be on the jury and two alternates will be selected as well.
Seven men and five women have been selected for the jury. One alternate has been chosen and on Tuesday morning, 10 more potential jurors will be called, so the court can find another alternate juror.
Jurors asked about racial bias
The day started with Assistant Cown Attorney Steve O'Brien, the prosecutor, asking Justice Stephen Glithero for permission to question prospective jurors about bias based on the fact the deceased person was Indigenous and the accused person is white. Glithero asked asking Khill's lawyer, Jeff Manishen, if he objected.
When he did not, the judge approved the specific language of the question.
The ability to ask that question is a key issue for members of the Indigenous community keeping an eye on how the trial is handled by the legal system.
Ava Hill, Chief of the Six Nations of the Grand River, said she will be watching the selection closely to make sure the "same mistakes," around the legal process that were criticized after the Stanley trial aren't made again.
During questioning, three jurors excused themselves, including one man who said he would "struggle" with being impartial based on the backgrounds of the accused and victim.
Another man said he wasn't fit for the jury because he believes the "system is deeply flawed" and a women said she lives in the same area as Khill and has had her house broken into four times, meaning she too believed she couldn't be impartial.
Roach said he's aware of only two other cases where juries in Canada were asked about potential bias in cases involving Indigenous people, meaning it's "relatively novel."
"This at least attempts to screen all of the prospective jurors for racist bias," he explained.
"Is this one question foolproof? Probably not, but it is consistent with how far the courts have gone and I think it's a good precaution."