WINNIPEG –
The lawyers of an alleged serial killer in Winnipeg are questioning whether pre-trial publicity in the high-profile case may have influenced the jury’s decision-making ability, after a public poll commissioned by the defence found 81 per cent of respondents believe the accused is guilty.
Jeremy Skibicki is charged with four counts of first-degree murder in the deaths of four Indigenous women: Rebecca Contois, Morgan Harris, Marcedes Myran, and a fourth unidentified woman who Indigenous have given the name Mashkode Bizhiki’ikwe or Buffalo Woman.
He has pleaded not guilty.
His defence lawyers’ bid to toss the jury in the trial continued Tuesday in Manitoba’s Court of King’s Bench.
READ MORE: Winnipeg trial of man accused of killing four women starts with bid to toss jury
Skibicki’s lawyers launched a constitutional question over the partiality of the jury, seeking to have the case heard by judge-alone and not a jury.
The argument hinges on a public opinion poll commissioned by Legal Aid Manitoba, which is representing Skibicki in the case. The poll, conducted by Mainstreet Research in February, posed questions to 906 Manitobans, all of whom were eligible for a jury.
The poll gathered thoughts on Skibicki and what respondents think of various potential defences in the case – such as a defence that he is not criminally responsible due to mental disorder.
The poll, which was released to the media by the court Tuesday, found – of the people aware of the Skibicki case – 81 per cent of respondents believed the accused was guilty based on what they had seen, read or heard about the case. The poll said 17 per cent were unsure, and 2 per cent said they believe he is not guilty.
Ninety-five per cent of the respondents aware of the case indicated they had a somewhat or strongly negative opinion of Skibicki, while only five per cent said they had a somewhat or strongly positive opinion.
The court heard on Monday the poll has a margin of error of +/- 3.3 per cent.
Defence lawyers are looking to call Dr. Christine Ruva, a U.S.-based psychologist and professor who has extensively studied the influence of pre-trial publicity can have on jury decision-making in the United States. Crown prosecutors have objected, arguing she is not qualified to give expert opinion about the Canadian jury system.
The matter is set to continue Tuesday afternoon.