Lawyers say Zameer’s acquittal shows why politicians should remain silent on bail; Ford: “I had limited information”

OTTAWA – An innocent man could have spent years in prison if a judge had not granted him bail, a civil liberties advocate said Monday, as lawyers warned that Umar Zameer’s case underscores the risks that leaders politicians intervene in bail decisions.

A jury found Zameer not guilty Sunday of the Toronto police officer’s death. Jeffrey Northrup, run over in an underground parking lot in July 2021.

Zameer was granted bail a few months later, a decision that drew public criticism from Ontario Premier Doug Ford, who at the time called his release “beyond comprehension” and “completely unacceptable.”

But it wasn’t until the jury was sequestered last week that Canadians learned how weak the case against Zameer had turned out to be.

Shakir Rahim, who directs the criminal justice program at the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, said Zameer’s case underscores why bail is “essential” to protect Canadians, even those accused of crimes. more serious.

“Without bail, Mr. Zameer, an innocent man, would have spent three years in prison,” he said. “This case is not unusual. “Half of criminal cases in Canada do not end in a guilty verdict.”

Ontario Superior Court Justice Jill Copeland, who is now a Court of Appeal judge, said in her 2021 ruling that she considered the case against Zameer “weak,” noting in particular that the lack of evidence about motive It was a “significant weakness.”

Former Toronto Mayor John Tory also spoke out against Zameer’s release. Since the verdict, he acknowledged having learned lessons from the ordeal, according to a report by The Toronto Star.

‘I had limited information’: Premier Ford

At the time, Ford cited Zameer’s release as an example of the justice system’s need to “get its act together” and put “victims and their families ahead of criminals.”

The prime minister struck a decidedly different tone on Tuesday.

“It is a very sad situation that occurred and I respect the court’s decision. My heart also goes out to Margaret and her family,” she said, referring to Northrup’s widow.

“At that time I had limited information. The courts have decided, the jury decided and we must respect the justice system.”

The initial outrage over Zameer’s release reflects long-standing complaints that many political and law enforcement leaders have expressed when it comes to an accused person’s ability to access pretrial detention.

Growing public safety anxiety stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with several violent crimes allegedly committed by people released on bail, has caused the political debate over bail to explode in recent years.

Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre repudiated Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s criminal record and promised to better combat repeat offenders.

Calls from premiers and police chiefs to strengthen the ability of defendants to access bail, especially if they have a criminal record, led the federal Liberals to pass a series of bail reforms, such as the expanded use of reverse liability provisions for certain offenders.

That means that instead of a Crown prosecutor having to show in court why an accused person should remain behind bars until trial, the accused person has to show why they should be released.

The provision was expanded to include more firearms and weapons crimes, and more circumstances in which the alleged crime involves intimate partner violence.

Boris Bytensky, president of the Criminal Lawyers Association, says Zameer’s case differs from the current debate because he had no criminal record.

Still, he says, the issue offers a perfect teaching moment for political leaders who want to use bail as a “marketing tool” for their own political advantage.

“The mere fact that they are making comments as public officials … really damages reputation in the justice system,” Bytensky said in an interview Tuesday.

“It doesn’t help respect the justice system, which is ultimately what we need. … If the public does not respect this system of justice and individual judges, they will not respect the law.”

Ford’s original comments have since been shown to be unfounded, the Ontario Federation of Law Associations said in a statement.

It is unacceptable that leaders “spread misinformation about our criminal justice system and score cheap political points at the expense of courts and judges,” said Douglas Judson, president of the federation.

Not only do politicians lack facts to speak about specific bail decisions, but when they do, they damage the reputation of the justice system and the presumption of innocence, Bytensky said.

Zameer’s case provides an opportunity to better educate Canadians about how the system works and what “presumption of innocence” really means, he added.

“We pay lip service to the presumption of innocence, but I don’t think we really consider it,” Bytensky said.

After the jury’s verdict came back on Sunday, the judge went so far as to apologize to Zameer for what he had been forced to endure.

Rahim says that when political leaders use their platforms to speak out against bail decisions, “they risk inflaming public opinion,” which can raise concerns about a defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Daniel Brown, a defense lawyer and former president of the Criminal Lawyers Association, previously told The Canadian Press that the fact that Ford and others intervened in Zameer’s case created a “false narrative” that affected how the public viewed to Zameer.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 23, 2024.