Front Burner - Cindy Gladue and the painful cost of justice

Episode Date: February 25, 2021

The death of Cindy Gladue became a flashpoint for the anger surrounding missing and murdered Indigenous women in Canada. Now, a manslaughter conviction for Bradley Barton closes the long legal saga �� but as CBC reporter Jorge Barrera tells us, for Gladue's family, healing has just begun.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. Actually, you know, your mom was a big influence in my life. She was a little bit older, but she always babysat me. And I really loved her. Hi, I'm Jorge Barrera.

I'm a reporter with CBC News. And last Thursday I shared a KFC meal with the family of Cindy Gladue. And they asked me to join a sharing circle. Then I met Cindy. Cindy was a little girl. Yeah, she was. She was a baby too. Yeah. You've probably heard of Cindy,

a cremating woman whose body was found in the bathtub of an Edmonton hotel in 2011. She was 36 years old and a mother of three daughters. Her story has really been a flashpoint for the anger surrounding missing and murdered Indigenous women in this country. And for many, her story exemplified the indignity and lack of justice Indigenous women often receive in the courts. On Friday after the sharing circle, Bradley Barton, a former truck driver from Mississauga, was convicted of manslaughter in Cindy's death. It was the second time Barton was tried for the crime.

He was acquitted of first-degree murder and manslaughter back in 2015. So for the family, it's been a long, deeply traumatic 10 years. And last Thursday, the night before the verdict, was the first time they had gathered to talk about it. I come because I wanted to just make sure that we honour your mom and your daughter,

your niece, your cousin. I say that because people said so many awful things but people don't really know the story. The sharing circle was at the home of Cindy's cousin Prairie. I want you guys to always know that we're here when this verdict when all this stuff is gone you call me I'm going to be here. I want to stand beside you because I know that's part of the healing journey

and I think I think this is a time we start to start that trauma healing and working with each other, being with one another. So thank you guys for coming, and I hope you guys come all the time. Bring your babies. We'll have dinners together. I want to do that. Cindy's family has been very reluctant to speak to media. Some of the coverage of her story, especially during the first trial, it felt reduced Cindy to one night and one horrific act. You know, the family asked me to take part in the sharing circle and record it, but to be part of it, it means you have to

also share. So Jorge, how we do it? Whatever you'd like to share in the circle It's your turn First of all, I just want to thank you I told them that I had always followed Cindy's story and that once I reported on an expert witness used by the defense who had really shaky credentials it was just one of the many flaws with that first trial and that I was there in

the sharing circle because I had been asked to reflect a fuller image of Cindy through the memories of her family, an image obscured by 10 years of brutal testimony and headlines. And I met Cindy when she was a teenager too. Her family described someone who was caring and outgoing and a source of joy. Marina, a cousin of Cindy's mom, remembered spending New Year's Eve with Cindy and her mom and daughters. We had fun dancing. We had a good time. I'll show you how to twist.

That was the last New Year's party we did with her. Yeah, that's the last New Year's I spent with Cindy. It was great. Never thought I would never meet her again. Cindy's daughter Cheyenne remembered coming home after school in grade 3 and curling up with her mom on the couch. And then I sat beside her and she was watching her cooking show like she always was. And then I just snuggled up beside her and she was watching her cooking show like she always was. And then I just snuggled up beside her and then we watched the cooking show and she would sit there and

talk about how she wanted to make it. And that's something I'll always remember. She was always baking or cooking or doing something like that. Cindy's mom, Donna, also remembered those cooking shows. Can't watch nothing else. We have to wait for her to watch her show. She loved cooking too at home. Always made sure that I eat breakfast because I don't eat breakfast. that I eat breakfast, because I don't eat breakfast. One day she had an appointment,

and she goes, mom, I don't have time to cook for you. And the way I worded it out was, well, Cindy, who's gonna cook for me when you're gone? And I didn't know that was the last time. Miss her so much. Why this happened to her? Bradley Barton will be sentenced this spring. And after 10 years, this legal saga is coming to a close. But for Cindy Gled Gladue's family,

the healing is just beginning. Hi, Jorge. Thank you so much for sharing that with us. Thanks for having me. So as we just heard from you, this family has gone through so much in the last 10 years. Firstly, of course, the death of their loved one, and then having to sit through two long criminal trials. And I just want to go over the basics of the case and a warning to our listeners that some of this is very disturbing, very upsetting. So as you mentioned, in 2011, Cindy's body was found in a bathtub in an Edmonton hotel room. And we know that she went to that hotel room with this truck driver, Bradley Barton.

And we know that she died from an 11 centimeter gash in her vagina. We also know that Barton admitted that he caused that injury with his hand. That's all agreed upon. So what question did this second trial hinge on? Well, the second trial really hinged on Cindy Gladue's consent. If the Crown could prove that Cindy did not consent to this act that she was subjected to, then it would flow to the manslaughter charge because the facts of the matter that the defense and the Crown all agreed on is that Bradley Barton's actions were connected to her death. And that from the defense's arguments,

Barton never meant to hurt her, and he believed that he had consent because of the $60 transaction that he had with her. So the Crown's case basically broke down into, you know, three paths around consent. Either St. Gladue didn't consent because she was incapable of it, because she was incapacitated. She had four times the legal limits of alcohol in her body. But if the jury didn't think this was enough or didn't think she was totally incapacitated then the question

was did Barton obtain consent from Gladue to commit this this forceful act? Because based on the testimony Barton never asked her directly, ever, whether he could do X, Y, or Z. There was no communication. And under Canadian law, you must obtain consent for every step in an encounter that progressively gets harsher. And that was clear there was really no communication of consent. And thirdly, there would be no consent if Barton wanted to hurt her or knew that he could hurt her. And nine days before she was found in this hotel room, before she was found in this hotel room.

The jury in the second trial were told that Barton searched for pornography that depicted this very act. I just want to pick up on this idea that you mentioned of implied consent. I understand that part of the reason the Supreme Court of Canada ordered this new trial was because of the way that this issue of consent was treated in the first trial back in 2015. And what did the Supreme Court say about this? Well, the Supreme Court really hung it on the

trial judge's instructions to the jury. The trial judge, in his instructions, never told the jury that there actually is no such thing as implied consent in Canadian law. It just doesn't exist. However, the defense's argument was that Barton, in his mind, argument was that Barton in his mind thought he had consent by, you know, a previous interaction the night before, by her silence. She never said no. But the trial judge never told the jury that, you know, these arguments were wrong in law, had nothing to do with whether they were wrong in fact. There's just no such thing under the law as implied consent. I know another criticism of the first trial was that it didn't follow Canada's rape shield law, which prevents sexual history from being admitted as evidence that might suggest a victim was more likely to give consent or less worthy of being believed, right?

Yes, and that was another thing the high court said that the trial judge failed around evidence submitted by the defense on that because of a previous commercial transaction the night before so they met two nights so the first night there was an exchange of $60. And in the instructions to the jury, the trial judge never explained this section of the criminal code and the limitations around this type of evidence. And that was another fatal flaw in law that led to the Supreme Court to reorder a new manslaughter trial. Okay, and yet another criticism of that first trial was that it dehumanized Cindy, both

in terms of the way that she was talked about and some of the evidence that was submitted. And can you tell me about that? Well, first, it's the obscuring of Cindy Gladue through referring to her, and this was in both crown and defense arguments, as the, quote, native lady. You know, that was repeated over and over again, and also labeling her as a prostitute. Her name was supplanted by these labels. She became a stereotype. name was supplanted by these labels, she became a stereotype. There was also the issue of using her body parts as evidence in this trial. The judge allowed for the use of Cindy Gladue's pelvis as evidence to help Alberta's chief, then chief medical examiner explain his testimony.

So they brought in her preserved tissues and had it in an adjacent room, and that was projected into the courtroom as the former chief medical examiner went through his testimony explaining that 10- 10 centimeter gash. Right. I remember this was the first time that human tissue was accepted as evidence in a Canadian courtroom. Jorge, it is really hard for me to sit here and listen to you talk about some of these details. And I can't even imagine what this must have been like for Cindy's family to sit through that first trial imagine they're grappling with the loss of a

daughter the loss of a mother the loss of a sister the loss of a cousin, you know, the hole that leaves in your life, and then to sit through a first trial and not only have those, like, last horrific moments of her life replayed, crossed, shown in exhibits and photos, hearing her referred to as Native Lady, and then to have a part of her be brought in as evidence and to sit through someone clinically explain the wound. They basically had to watch her death in slow motion and dissected and then after all that to have a jury come back with a not guilty verdict you know the layer of trauma that this created the justice system that's supposed to be searching for and

trying to achieve justice you know basically committed violence to cindy's character and body through this process and at the end of it it wasn't enough and then to wait through appeals, the Interior Court of Appeal, and then the Supreme Court, where, you know, the case was summarized over and over again. And for this to last for 10 years, her loss remained fresh for them. It remains difficult to speak about because it is still unfolding. How do you think the second trial compared to the first? Did it seem to treat Cindy Gladue and her story with more respect? Yes, and this was acknowledged by all sides in this. Even so, the nature of her death and the crime still revolved around her most private, most sacred part of her body. And it focused on what caused the rupture.

caused the rupture. The actual tissue of the wall and the defense presented arguments that somehow because she had missing teeth or that she smoked and there was questions about her nutrition, that this caused her, the wall of her tissue to be weaker and that somehow that was her fault

that the force of this act killed her and the defense's you know sort of final summation he traced copernicus to galileo and the mysteries of the cosmos and how long it took you know for science to catch up with the idea that you know the earth revolved around the sun and then connected it to the mysteries of the vagina and what we don't know about it and then you had the crown in their argument to sort of drive home the point of the the pain that she must have been through to continually compare the size of barton's hand to the head of a baby and how barton's hand was bigger than a baby's head and how at birth the body creates natural lubricants for this there you know the body prepares for this for this for birth but this wasn't a birth this was um basically an attack and and he kept on

repeating you know comparing a baby's head to the hand just to, and repeatedly. Listening to that, it was, it's incredibly jarring as a spectator. And after a 10-year road for a family that has sat through this twice, you know, it's an understatement to say it couldn't have been easy. Yeah. That Barton was convicted of manslaughter, did this feel like justice to them at all? I think it felt like relief, bittersweet relief.

You know, Donna McLeod, her mom, you know, spoke to CBC after, moments after the verdict as she walked out. And, you know, she said, after all this time. Justice, how many years for this? Okay, now it's all over. And I'm thankful.

It's over. My daughter, you know, she was a daughter, she was a mom, you know, a grandmother. Now it's over. Everybody's happy now. You know, finally justice, but after all this time. And I think that's the most important part of trying to come to some sense of how, because you can't be in their mind. You cannot put yourself in their shoes because it's impossible. But coupling after all this time with it's over,

and she said it's over, it's bittersweet. After all this time, They get a guilty verdict, but everything that came before it still hurts. Hmm. You know, Jorge, Cindy Gladue's story has in so many ways just been emblematic of the crisis of missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in Canada and how difficult it often is for Indigenous women to get justice in this country. Does the fact that the second trial was conducted with more respect and the fact that there was a conviction, do you think that represents in some way some kind of progress here? You could call it progress, but at what cost?

What did the family of Cindy Ledjew have to go through? How many protests did there have to be in cities across Canada for this progress to happen? It came at a great cost. It came at great suffering. Not only did the family have to suffer through the death of a loved one, a sudden violent death of a loved one, but then they had to suffer through the justice system failing them and then sit through it again with no guarantee that it was going to succeed. And all the, you know, the change in tone, the change in the jury instructions, the Supreme Court ruling, you know, all that followed a family being traumatized over and over again. Is that what it takes for there to be progress does there need does there constantly be to need an outcry people on the streets reacting to

something that common sense tells you that is that is outrageous. So was there progress? Was her second trial a sign of progress? Yes. But what was the price for that progress? Jorge, thank you so much for this. Thank you especially for bringing the story of Cindy's family to us. We're really appreciative. Thanks for having me.

I'm going to go. empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. Hi, it's Ramit Sethi here. You may have seen my money show on Netflix. I've been talking about money for 20 years. I've talked to millions of people and I have some startling numbers to share with you. Did you know that of the people I speak to, 50% of them do not know their own household income? That's not a typo. 50%. That's because money is confusing.

In my new book and podcast, Money for Couples, I help you and your partner create a financial vision together. To listen to this podcast, just search for Money for Couples. For more CBC podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts.