Jeremy Skibicki's trial: Lawyers continue to try to throw out jury

WINNIPEG –

Lawyers for a suspected Winnipeg serial killer are questioning whether pre-trial publicity in the high-profile case has affected jurors' ability to make decisions, after a public survey commissioned by the defense found 81 per cent of respondents believed the accused guilty. guilty.

Jeremy Skibicki has been charged with four counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of four local women: Rebecca Contois, Morgan Harris, Marcedes Mairan and a fourth unidentified woman, identified by locals as Mashkode Bijikiikwe, or Buffalo Woman.

He pleaded not guilty.

His lawyers' motion to throw out a jury in the trial continued Tuesday in the Court of Crown Bench in Manitoba.

READ MORE: Trial of Winnipeg man accused of killing four women begins with jury impaneled.

Skibicki's attorneys have raised a constitutional question about the partial jury trial, demanding that the case be heard by a judge and not by a jury.

The argument hinges on a survey commissioned by Manitoba Legal Aid, which represents Skibicki. In February, a survey by Mainstreet Research asked 906 Manitobans who were eligible for jury duty.

The survey gathered thoughts about Skibicki and respondents' thoughts on various possible defenses in the case, such as the defense that he is not criminally liable due to mental disorder.

A poll released to the media by the court on Tuesday found that 81 percent of respondents believed the defendant was guilty, based on what they had seen, read or heard about the case. The survey found that 17 percent were unsure, and 2 percent said he was not guilty.

Ninety-five percent of respondents who were aware of the case indicated that they had a somewhat or strongly negative opinion of Skibicki, while only five percent said they had a somewhat or strongly favorable opinion.

The court said Monday that the poll's margin of error was +/- 3.3 percent.

Expert witness Dr. Christine Ruwa, a US-based cognitive psychologist and professor, told the court that one of the reasons for the survey was to assess bias in society.

He has extensively researched the impact of pretrial publicity on jury decision making in the United States, and reported that there was a significant amount of coverage in this case, with more than 400 articles.

“The more pre-trial publicity, the more impartiality,” Ruwa said in court.

When Skibicki's defense attorney asked if jurors might change their minds after the evidence was presented in court, Ruwa said it was unlikely.

“People's beliefs about the defendant's guilt in the case after exposure to pre-trial publicity remain about the same after trial evidence,” he said.

He said the safest way to avoid jury bias is to allow people to serve on a jury only if they have never heard of the case before.

However, Crown prosecutor Christian Vanderhooft disputed Ruva's testimony, pointing to a high-profile jury trial in the death of 15-year-old First Nations girl Tina Fontaine, who was killed in Winnipeg.

The death and pretrial information were important, Vanderhooft said, but in this case, the jury acquitted the defendant.

“Juries and juries acquit people all the time — not everyone is found guilty,” Vanderhooft said.

Ruwa agreed, but said his research was based on many cases, not just one.

“I have yet to be in a place where a person has not been found guilty,” he said.

A 12-member jury and two alternates were selected in Skibicki's case in April. The court heard on Tuesday that more than half of them said they had never heard of the case before.

The case continues in court on Wednesday.