GORE BAY—The appeal of two charges in the case of Green Bay farmer Paul Skippen who was charged with the shooting of a Canada goose from the roadside beside his farm is still ongoing after a judge told the Gore Bay court last Friday afternoon that, considering the many complexities of the case, he would need time for deliberation. The trial was unfair, Mr. Skippen’s lawyer Brad Allison argued, from a myriad of issues. “Death by a thousand duck bites,” he observed to the court.
Last year, following trial, Mr. Skippen was charged with shooting a Canada goose out of season and without a permit and shooting a firearm from the roadway. He was fined $1,250 and was forced to forfeit a gun (although not the gun used in the incident). Mr. Skippen and his lawyer Brad Allison were in court last Friday to appeal the charges, surrounded by friends and family.
After much backroom discussion, and with two offers on the table from the Crown prosecutor, Mr. Skippen waived all offers and asked to proceed with the appeal.
“I’m proud of you, Paul Skippen, for standing up for what you believe in,” Mr. Skippen’s partner Nancy McFarlane was overheard encouraging the plaintiff, rubbing his shoulders as he sat in the front bench, waiting for the proceeding to begin.
“Well, there’s more than one way to skin a goose,” Mr. Allison said before taking the podium and launching into his appeal.
Mr. Allison told the court that Mr. Skippen’s position was that the trial process was not fair or reasonable in retrospect. “It’s a litany of issues that have been highlighted in a lengthy factum (statement of the facts of the case) and appeal; longer than I would have liked,” the lawyer admitted.
Mr. Allison spoke to the court about issues he saw with the Crown’s ‘theory of impossibility’ regarding Mr. Skippen being witnessed by two people shooting from the roadway which led to a lengthy dialogue involving discussions of truck widths, road widths and where each truck was positioned at the time and how, according to Mr. Allison and Mr. Skippen, it would have been almost impossible for the witnesses to have observed Mr. Skippen shooting from the roadway, which he said he did not.
“At the end of the day, it is whether one can say beyond a reasonable doubt that he shot from the roadway,” Mr. Allison said.
Mr. Allison further said that Justice Darlene Hayden, who tried the case, “reverse-engineered the evidence to get a finding” because she came to a conclusion that the witness had overestimated the distance of the truck on the road.
“That’s offensive,” Mr. Allison said, “and it smacks of reverse-engineering the trial.”
Mr. Allison also brought forward issues with jurisdiction considering that some of Mr. Skippen’s charges fell under federal law (such as the Migratory Birds Act) saying that proper process for dealing with those charges was not followed.
“It wasn’t the outcome of the jurisdictional process, but how the justice (Hayden) got to it,” the lawyer noted.
Mr. Allison also raised concerns with the sentencing as Justice Hayden went above and beyond what the prosecutor had asked for by way of imposing her sentence.
“It was a pattern that leads me to say, Mr. Skippen didn’t get a fair trial,” Mr. Allison concluded before Crown prosecutor Paul Gonzalez began his address to the court, refuting Mr. Allison’s claims.
“What might seem like a simple case certainly isn’t,” Judge Buttazzoni said. “I can’t put together a decision today. Counsel have given me thoughtful submissions.”
The judge estimated his written response would be rendered within six to eight weeks.
