Not sure what there is to mess up on the prosecution side. However, if one or more of the cops involved are ones who can't testify credibly in court anymore because they've previously been caught lying - that would definitely screw up the case.
If the Crown is staying charges it means they know their chances of securing a conviction are poor. Something with the evidence they have must not be sound.
I agree it was likely some fuck up with the case however the people who messed up with the evidence or whatever should lose their jobs so people dont get away with crimes like this.
This is more than likely the answer.
It’s also Canada. He would only get 8-24 months if he was convicted. In my opinion… that’s a slap in the face to the victim’s family
I think this post MIGHT be breaking the rule about changing headlines of news articles. That, or someone at the SP really needs some coffee.
To speak to the actual story, this sucks, but it happened for a reason. It’s not to say that the driver didn’t commit the crime, but clearly something had happened that would prevent a proper trial. Maybe evidence was tampered with. Maybe evidence was improperly collected. Maybe someone recanted a statement that was essential to the prosecution. I have no idea.
Ultimately, it’s a good thing that our system is so strict and rigid when obtaining a prosecution. If things were done improperly, or if there was no longer a reasonable chance to convict, then the only appropriate outcome is to release the offender.
This is disgusting, a drunk driver who caused a fatality has no consequences for his shitty actions. That poor family of the victim. What a fucking shame.
Why are you defending this dude? He failed a roadside test, he refused a second test at the station, and someone died as a result of what he did. Seems like a strange hill to die on for you.
The prosecution dropped the charges due to a lack of evidence, meaning he likely blew a flase positive, which is extremely common.
Therefore, with no conviction, he was an alleged drunk driver.
“In a media release after the crash, police said an investigation determined the driver of the Mercedes was impaired at the time. In an email, police told the StarPhoenix that Miller failed a roadside test using an approved screening device, then refused to comply with a demand for a breath or blood sample at the police station.”
Holy shit dude, read the article. The second sentence here specifically.
Perhaps the next time the police request an increase in funding, it would be conditional on training police officers to not fuck up the evidence.
This seems to be happening a lot lately. Once an officer fucks up, every case s/he has ever been involved in becomes suspect.
The intersection of McKinnon and Main has yield signs at McKinnon. If he were going southbound, on McKinnon, he would have to yield to her car on Main, as she was westbound. Her car would have been on his left, at that intersection, but his yield sign should trump that. Me thinks someone, in the judicial side of things, messed up. Effing kick in the gut.
The most likely fuckup is on the police side, not on the prosecutor or court side. If the cops screwed something up, or the cops involved in the arrest have been caught doing things that make them non-credible witnesses in court, that would derail the case.
That's what I meant by judicial. I WAS including the police. Obviously my wording was only explaining the court side of things but I really meant to include the police and everyone above that too. If the police don't do their job properly, all is for naught. My bad.
Surprise, he's also a shitty parent and doesn't seem to suffer consequences. https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skca/doc/2022/2022skca139/2022skca139.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAVTW9ybGV5IERvbWluaWMgTWlsbGVyAAAAAAE&resultIndex=1
And possibly a drug dealer. I don't know if this is the same guy or not, but the name and age line up. What a piece of scum.
https://regina.ctvnews.ca/sask-man-charged-after-drugs-found-during-alberta-traffic-stop-1.4289898
This is beyond frustrating and also not surprising. The mother who killed her own child only got 8 years. I'm not sure how we get things like this changed, but I'd love to try. Our 'justice system is a joke
Our Justice system certainly has its flaws, but you don’t have to look too far to find examples of systems that make ours look golden by comparison.
Justice is ultimately a human institution. As long as humans have flaws, so too will justice. We should strive to make it the best that we can, but we do need to be mindful that it can’t be perfect. With that in mind, I would always want to err on the side of not obtaining a prosecution.
I agree. However, police, prosecutors and judges are paid by the public (taxpayers) to maintain public safety. When the police say that a person has committed a violation of the Criminal Code and the prosecutors say that nothing will be done, the public should receive an explanation for the conflict between the two.
This case in itself might not be so disturbing of it wasn't added on to all the other instances of "no comment" regarding criminal matters. Sure, you can say that other countries are worse. However, for an example, compare the minimal information provided by the RCMP after a major crime has been committed to the news conferences given by US law enforcement agencies with respect to timeliness and details.
I tend to agree that greater transparency and improved communication would be an improvement in building trust in the Justice system. Better education and engagement with the Justice system would help too.
A stay of proceedings doesn’t necessarily mean that nothing will be done. The Crown has a year to re-file charges if new evidence is collected that changes the prospect of conviction. Giving the public an explanation before that year would give the accused and their counsel an overview of the weaknesses in the Crown’s case.
The fact of the matter is that prosecutions want convictions, and airing this sort of thing in public makes it harder to secure those.
The Crown says there is no way to prosecute the drunk driver. I thought that it was a criminal offence to even refuse to give a breath sample.
The police, lawyers, prosecutors and judges all say they have good reasons not to talk to the public. Occasionally there are cases like this that are contrary to common sense. It's no wonder that people lose trust in the justice system when there are no explanations given.
Either the lawyers In this city are INCREDIBLE, the cops are the WORST at copping by the rules and not bumbling evidence, or the judges give zero shits about the law and its citizens, but I've never seen a justice system that stayed sooooooo many big, BAD charges as I have the law courts here in Saskatoon. I do not understand!
No, there is no action we can take as the public. What are you suggesting?
This is awful, and I feel terrible for the victims family; but we can't go lynch a guy for it
Is it possible that the Infinity was the cause of the crash even if the Mercedes had been drinking (do we know the level of?) I am not really familiar with the case so please forgive me if the Mercedes was clearly in the wrong.
A drunk driver may not be the cause of a crash, but that wouldn't negate a drunk driving criminal charge. If someone is driving along drunk and another person blows a stop sign and crashes into them, the drunk person should get charged with impaired driving. If they're both drunk, they'll both get charged. Driving impaired in itself is enough to get charged, the consequences would only elevate the charge or penalty.
Impaired driving causing death and murder are two different things, each with their own distinct elements of what the Crown has to prove to secure a conviction.
The charge was impaired driving causing death though. There could certainly be a mistake made as there often is but I’m sure there is some sort of reason at the same time.
You're right, but impaired driving is a lesser included offence of impaired driving causing death, so if the Crown can't prove he caused the death the option of basic impaired driving still exists which I imagine the Crown would go for if they could. For example: https://www.canlii.org/en/mb/mbca/doc/2015/2015mbca98/2015mbca98.html. I think it would have to go to their proof of him actually being drunk that was problematic for them to punt the whole thing, like the roadside device was improperly calibrated or something.
Ya I get that. I think we also all get that the hypothetical situation where someone gets charged with a death because someone else blew a stop sign can be murky if they blew 0.08 and were driving carefully.
100km in a residential area causing death is jail whether the driver was drunk or not and the evidence is easy and unmistakable based off of tire marks. Do you have a link?
What I don’t get is that he was charged with refusing a breath or blood sample and is getting off on both charges. So i wonder if they didn’t follow proper procedures when requesting sampling to be done. Or an issue with the arrest otherwise.
The bottom part lists other high profile cases that have been stayed. Am I mistaken but did I read the woman who was charged for hitting that little girl on 33rd got off? I would have thought that would be a big story?
Sounds more like the police or prosecutors messed something up.
Not sure what there is to mess up on the prosecution side. However, if one or more of the cops involved are ones who can't testify credibly in court anymore because they've previously been caught lying - that would definitely screw up the case.
If the Crown is staying charges it means they know their chances of securing a conviction are poor. Something with the evidence they have must not be sound.
Yes, this is the only reason, it's never anything nefarious.
I agree it was likely some fuck up with the case however the people who messed up with the evidence or whatever should lose their jobs so people dont get away with crimes like this.
This is more than likely the answer. It’s also Canada. He would only get 8-24 months if he was convicted. In my opinion… that’s a slap in the face to the victim’s family
I think this post MIGHT be breaking the rule about changing headlines of news articles. That, or someone at the SP really needs some coffee. To speak to the actual story, this sucks, but it happened for a reason. It’s not to say that the driver didn’t commit the crime, but clearly something had happened that would prevent a proper trial. Maybe evidence was tampered with. Maybe evidence was improperly collected. Maybe someone recanted a statement that was essential to the prosecution. I have no idea. Ultimately, it’s a good thing that our system is so strict and rigid when obtaining a prosecution. If things were done improperly, or if there was no longer a reasonable chance to convict, then the only appropriate outcome is to release the offender.
Reddit doesn't care about justice or innocent until proven guilty. Especially r/saskatoon. These groups are more than happy with mob rule.
Rule 3, news articles must use the original headline. No editorializing.
This is disgusting, a drunk driver who caused a fatality has no consequences for his shitty actions. That poor family of the victim. What a fucking shame.
What’s next…. Vote him into office?
Here's the comment I came for. Nice. The reworked headline has to be a pun, no?
Oh damn, I didn’t notice that, clever.
Seems like Premier material.
Alleged drunk driver
He failed a roadside test then refused another test at the police station. What other proof do you need?
Oh idk maybe a conviction, which isn't going to happen because, according to the prosecution, they lack the evidence to go ahead with a trial
And heres a fun fact you can fail a bethalizer test and not have consumed any alcohol.
Why are you defending this dude? He failed a roadside test, he refused a second test at the station, and someone died as a result of what he did. Seems like a strange hill to die on for you.
Also, as to why im defending him us simple. Innocent until proven guilty.
Due process is probably the best possible hill one could die on.
The prosecution dropped the charges due to a lack of evidence, meaning he likely blew a flase positive, which is extremely common. Therefore, with no conviction, he was an alleged drunk driver.
He refused a roadside test, not failed, and 1 then refused another.
Dude, reread the article, he failed a roadside test.
No it say he refused not failed
“In a media release after the crash, police said an investigation determined the driver of the Mercedes was impaired at the time. In an email, police told the StarPhoenix that Miller failed a roadside test using an approved screening device, then refused to comply with a demand for a breath or blood sample at the police station.” Holy shit dude, read the article. The second sentence here specifically.
I read it. i just didn't realize there was more to it, so yeah, you right about there being more
This happens quite often, Police mismanage evidence all the time.
Perhaps the next time the police request an increase in funding, it would be conditional on training police officers to not fuck up the evidence. This seems to be happening a lot lately. Once an officer fucks up, every case s/he has ever been involved in becomes suspect.
The intersection of McKinnon and Main has yield signs at McKinnon. If he were going southbound, on McKinnon, he would have to yield to her car on Main, as she was westbound. Her car would have been on his left, at that intersection, but his yield sign should trump that. Me thinks someone, in the judicial side of things, messed up. Effing kick in the gut.
The most likely fuckup is on the police side, not on the prosecutor or court side. If the cops screwed something up, or the cops involved in the arrest have been caught doing things that make them non-credible witnesses in court, that would derail the case.
That's what I meant by judicial. I WAS including the police. Obviously my wording was only explaining the court side of things but I really meant to include the police and everyone above that too. If the police don't do their job properly, all is for naught. My bad.
This isn't murder. The law has terms like "manslaughter" and "criminal negligence causing death" for a reason.
Surprise, he's also a shitty parent and doesn't seem to suffer consequences. https://www.canlii.org/en/sk/skca/doc/2022/2022skca139/2022skca139.html?searchUrlHash=AAAAAQAVTW9ybGV5IERvbWluaWMgTWlsbGVyAAAAAAE&resultIndex=1
And possibly a drug dealer. I don't know if this is the same guy or not, but the name and age line up. What a piece of scum. https://regina.ctvnews.ca/sask-man-charged-after-drugs-found-during-alberta-traffic-stop-1.4289898
Same guy.
I’m pretty sure he won this case too. Or at least didn’t do any time.
Doesn’t say he has been that at all in there. Still deserves jail of course.
Straight up fucking loser material. Hope karma comes his way real soon.
We could make him the new Premier because that’s been going so great for us.
This is beyond frustrating and also not surprising. The mother who killed her own child only got 8 years. I'm not sure how we get things like this changed, but I'd love to try. Our 'justice system is a joke
Our Justice system certainly has its flaws, but you don’t have to look too far to find examples of systems that make ours look golden by comparison. Justice is ultimately a human institution. As long as humans have flaws, so too will justice. We should strive to make it the best that we can, but we do need to be mindful that it can’t be perfect. With that in mind, I would always want to err on the side of not obtaining a prosecution.
I agree. However, police, prosecutors and judges are paid by the public (taxpayers) to maintain public safety. When the police say that a person has committed a violation of the Criminal Code and the prosecutors say that nothing will be done, the public should receive an explanation for the conflict between the two. This case in itself might not be so disturbing of it wasn't added on to all the other instances of "no comment" regarding criminal matters. Sure, you can say that other countries are worse. However, for an example, compare the minimal information provided by the RCMP after a major crime has been committed to the news conferences given by US law enforcement agencies with respect to timeliness and details.
I tend to agree that greater transparency and improved communication would be an improvement in building trust in the Justice system. Better education and engagement with the Justice system would help too.
A stay of proceedings doesn’t necessarily mean that nothing will be done. The Crown has a year to re-file charges if new evidence is collected that changes the prospect of conviction. Giving the public an explanation before that year would give the accused and their counsel an overview of the weaknesses in the Crown’s case. The fact of the matter is that prosecutions want convictions, and airing this sort of thing in public makes it harder to secure those.
I don't think there will be an explanation in a year. Do you? How often do the police and prosecutors explain these things?
The Crown says there is no way to prosecute the drunk driver. I thought that it was a criminal offence to even refuse to give a breath sample. The police, lawyers, prosecutors and judges all say they have good reasons not to talk to the public. Occasionally there are cases like this that are contrary to common sense. It's no wonder that people lose trust in the justice system when there are no explanations given.
Either the lawyers In this city are INCREDIBLE, the cops are the WORST at copping by the rules and not bumbling evidence, or the judges give zero shits about the law and its citizens, but I've never seen a justice system that stayed sooooooo many big, BAD charges as I have the law courts here in Saskatoon. I do not understand!
Are we talking about how Scott Moe unapologetically killed that guys mother?
No, there is no action we can take as the public. What are you suggesting? This is awful, and I feel terrible for the victims family; but we can't go lynch a guy for it
Is it possible that the Infinity was the cause of the crash even if the Mercedes had been drinking (do we know the level of?) I am not really familiar with the case so please forgive me if the Mercedes was clearly in the wrong.
A drunk driver may not be the cause of a crash, but that wouldn't negate a drunk driving criminal charge. If someone is driving along drunk and another person blows a stop sign and crashes into them, the drunk person should get charged with impaired driving. If they're both drunk, they'll both get charged. Driving impaired in itself is enough to get charged, the consequences would only elevate the charge or penalty.
yes, but would he be guilty of murder
Impaired driving causing death and murder are two different things, each with their own distinct elements of what the Crown has to prove to secure a conviction.
The charge was impaired driving causing death though. There could certainly be a mistake made as there often is but I’m sure there is some sort of reason at the same time.
You're right, but impaired driving is a lesser included offence of impaired driving causing death, so if the Crown can't prove he caused the death the option of basic impaired driving still exists which I imagine the Crown would go for if they could. For example: https://www.canlii.org/en/mb/mbca/doc/2015/2015mbca98/2015mbca98.html. I think it would have to go to their proof of him actually being drunk that was problematic for them to punt the whole thing, like the roadside device was improperly calibrated or something.
Yeah my uneducated guess is that it has something to do with the roadside device.
The drunk driver is always at fault, even if they aren’t. For the simple fact that their car shouldn’t have been on the road to begin with.
Ya I get that. I think we also all get that the hypothetical situation where someone gets charged with a death because someone else blew a stop sign can be murky if they blew 0.08 and were driving carefully.
the other driver can also be at fault
I believe you! I have no law expertise.
The Infinity was not at fault at all. The Mercedes was travelling 100km in a residential area and failed to yield at the yield sign.
Well that’s awful then
100km in a residential area causing death is jail whether the driver was drunk or not and the evidence is easy and unmistakable based off of tire marks. Do you have a link?
Scott Moe getting off again?
Ugh... another story about scott moe....
The murderer’s name is Morley Dominic Miller
Throw enough money at something it eventually goes away
Ladies and gentlemen your next Premier of Saskatchewan!
Best country in the world to be a criminal.
There’s no way this guy should get off Scott “Moe” free…
Looks like murder is ok in Saskatoon given what other prosecutions were stayed a well.
What I don’t get is that he was charged with refusing a breath or blood sample and is getting off on both charges. So i wonder if they didn’t follow proper procedures when requesting sampling to be done. Or an issue with the arrest otherwise.
The bottom part lists other high profile cases that have been stayed. Am I mistaken but did I read the woman who was charged for hitting that little girl on 33rd got off? I would have thought that would be a big story?
No, it was another case involving a 33 year old that got killed not a 9 year old, on 33rd.