Judge expects ‘restraint and common sense’ from media

The door to courtroom one at the Whitehorse courthouse was locked this morning.

The door to courtroom one at the Whitehorse courthouse was locked this morning.

Inside, Crown and defence counsels in the Karen Rodrigue murder trial were discussing the potential damage done by a Yukon News article published

Friday which revealed evidence not yet heard by the jury.

When the doors opened and court reconvened, but before the jury was called back, Deputy Justice John Vertes had stern words for Tristin Hopper, the reporter who wrote the story.

“I would expect the press in this small community to show some restraint and common sense,” he said.

The evidence revealed in the News article was from a previous trial, one that has been referred to several times during this trial, but its relevance has never been explained to the jury.

Although some of that same evidence may be heard during the current trial, some may not.

“There is no certainty that evidence heard in the last trial will be heard in this one, or that it will be admissable,” the judge explained.

When reporting on a jury trial, it is against the law to publish any evidence not yet heard by the jury, as it may “contaminate” the juy’s verdict.

Vertes said if any member of the jury had read and been influenced by the News story, a mistrial would be the likely result.

“This trial is already four years old,” he said. “A mistrial would result in further anguish for the family…and further expense for the public.”

Fortunately, for those awaiting a final verdict, and also for the taxpayers who would fund another trial, this one will go ahead.

Vertes called the jurors in one by one and asked if they had read or heard any media reports on the trial since it began.

Except for one woman who said she had seen a headline relating to the case and turned the page without reading the article, everyone responded with a simple “No,” with one man adding, “I don’t read the newspaper in this town.”

As Crown counsel David McWhinnie pointed out, “There are restrictions in the (contempt of court section of the) Criminal Code of Canada on the publication of evidence taken outside of court.”

This is especially relevant in a jury trial wherein the jurists go home at the end of each day. This jury has not been sequestered.

McWhinnie did not say if Crown counsel intends to pursue contempt of court charges against the paper, which publishes three times a week. 

“I am not about to impose publication bans or restrictions on the press,” the judge said, adding that he had hoped he could rely on the ethical standards of publishers and broadcasters to help maintain the intergrity of the justice system.

Hopper said he “had no idea” that his story might have broken the law.

“We’ll be reviewing this turn of events,” News editor Richard Mostyn said today, before declining further comment.

The paper’s publisher, Stephen Robertson, also said he had no comment on the News’ story.