Case Summary
Rosemarie Desjarlais, a 43-year-old Métis woman who attended St. Bernard Mission residential school, was murdered sometime between June 19 and June 24, 1986.1 Desjarlais’ unclothed body was found in a rural gravel pit outside Ponoka, Alberta on June 25, 1986. She had been strangled to death and had suffered blunt force trauma.2
Wilson Nepoose, a man from the Samson Cree First Nation, lived in Maskwacis (formerly Hobbema), approximately 50 km south of Edmonton. Nepoose was known to the authorities due to a significant criminal record beginning in 1963.3 Police attention turned to him in connection with Desjarlais’ murder after local woman Lilly Mackinaw came forward as an eyewitness.4
Over the course of several months, Mackinaw gave eleven contradictory statements to police, some of which were not recorded.5 Many features of these statements were troubling. Mackinaw said that she had witnessed Nepoose stab Desjarlais at the Ponoka dump, though there was no evidence of stab wounds on her remains. She did not recognize the crime scene when police brought her there. She was not able to identify Desjarlais from a photo line-up. She did not recognize the 1976 Oldsmobile truck that she claimed to have seen at the dump.6 Despite these many concerning features, police focused exclusively on Mackinaw’s evidence; they failed to pursue any meaningful investigation outside of their pre-existing theory that Nepoose was the culprit.7
To strengthen their case, officers pressured Mackinaw’s friend Delma Bull into stating, falsely, that she saw Nepoose and Desjarlais at the Ponoka dump on June 23, 1986 (when police believed Desjarlais had been killed). Bull claimed that she specifically recalled this date because that was when she cashed her family allowance cheque.8 It later emerged that this cheque, which was in police possession, had actually been cashed two days prior.9 Bull also stated untruthfully that she drove an acquaintance’s 1976 Oldsmobile to the crime scene (in accordance with Mackniaw’s description).10 She would later explain that she went along with the police theory because “she was confused and scared by persistent police questioning” and had wanted to help Mackinaw, “whom she thought was in trouble with the police.”11 The RCMP officers had been insistent that Bull place Nepoose at the crime scene.12
On this frail foundation, Nepoose was arrested and charged with Desjarlais’ murder. At his trial, he called alibi evidence that he was attending a social gathering at the Rancher’s Inn at the approximate time of the murder.13 Nepoose’s nephew and brother both attested to his presence.14 The Crown called rebuttal evidence from the hotel manager, who said that there was no registration card for this date under their names. (In fact, their registration card was under a different attendee’s name that the manager had not been told to check.) The Crown portrayed Nepoose’s alibi to the jury as the “story of the Fantasyland Hotel”.15 Defence counsel did not explore verifiable specifics of Nepoose’s stay, including his room number, phone calls placed from this room, and invoicing information.16
An all-white jury convicted Nepoose of second degree murder on May 16, 1987.17 He was sentenced to life in prison with no parole eligibility for the first 15 years.18 Nepoose appealed his sentence (specifically the parole ineligibility period), but this appeal was dismissed in 1988.19 By then his family had exhausted their resources, having spent over $50,000 in legal fees.20
In June 1991, however, then Minister of Justice Kim Campbell referred Nepoose’s case back to the Alberta Court of Appeal, directing that it consider whether he had been wrongfully convicted.21 Minister Campbell expressed her concern that “there was possibly a miscarriage of justice [in this case, which] . . . should be resolved by the courts.”22 Nepoose was granted bail pending appeal on December 20, 1991. He had spent five years in prison.23
The Court of Appeal appointed Justice Sinclair (of the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench) “to inquire into and report back to this court concerning the credibility and weight of any [fresh] evidence . . . proposed to be offered” as to Nepoose’s innocence or guilt.24 Justice Sinclair held extensive hearings at which 22 witnesses testified and 97 exhibits were filed. He submitted a 253-page report documenting his findings in November 1991.25
This report identified a number of troubling deficiencies in the case against Nepoose. Notably, Mackinaw’s inconsistent statements had not been disclosed to the defence.26 In addition, the owner of the 1976 Oldsmobile truck testified that he did not loan it to Bull (and moreover he had not yet purchased it by the date in question).27 Further, Bull’s family allowance cheque (cashed on June 21, not June 23) had never been disclosed.28 Bull testified that she had lied at Nepoose’s trial, because: “I felt I had to, that was the only way I could go home.”29
The Alberta Court of Appeal held that had Mackinaw’s inconsistent statements been disclosed and introduced at trial, the jury would have determined “not only that [she] . . . was not credible but that she was perhaps delusionary.”30 The court also found, and the Crown conceded, that the police investigation was inadequate: the officers had not pursued promising leads, such as unidentified fingerprints found in Desjarlais’ apartment.31
In light of this fresh evidence, the Court of Appeal quashed Nepoose’s conviction, finding that he had likely suffered a miscarriage of justice. However, the court declined to acquit him and instead ordered a new trial. Mackinaw had died prior to the appeal, but the court found that her incriminating, if wildly implausible, statements could be read into the record for future jurors.32
Rather than proceed with a second trial, the Crown chose to stay the proceedings.33 Shortly after this decision was announced, Alberta Attorney General Ken Rostad stated: “I’d be very interested on what grounds there’d be compensation [for Nepoose] . . . I don’t think there’s been any determination that he’s been wrongly convicted. I think there’s been a change in testimony . . . that doesn’t mean he’s been wrongly convicted.”34
Two people were subsequently charged with perjury: Delma Bull and RCMP officer Donald Zazulak.35 The latter had circled the words “slime ball” and “yeah” on a colleague’s written message stating: “The [family allowance] cheque is still on file and will be returned once all avenues of appeal are exhausted for the slime ball”, meaning Nepoose.36 Zazulak later doctored this message, unsuccessfully attempting to obscure the phrase “slime ball” and his addenda to the note. He then denied having done so, under oath. His stated motive for this misconduct was to “protect the reputation” of the RCMP.37
Despite having admitted to lying under oath, Zazulak was acquitted on the perjury charge. The Court of Appeal overturned his acquittal in September 1993 and ordered a new trial. The court held that Zazulak’s testimony included “all the facts necessary to convict” him, but the trial judge had “erred in requiring a continuing intent” to mislead the court for a perjury conviction.38 Thus he had acquitted Zazulak because the officer later acknowledged and recanted his perjured evidence. The court specified that “a recantation constituted an explanation or clarification” as to the offender’s motives, not a defence to the charge.39
At his second trial, Zazulak was convicted of perjury, and sentenced to a single day’s jail, by the same judge who had first acquitted him.40 After an internal investigation, the RCMP demoted him from sergeant to corporal.41
In contrast, Bull was convicted at her perjury trial and sentenced to two years less a day in prison (that is, the highest possible reformatory sentence).42 She successfully appealed her conviction. The Alberta Court of Appeal found that the trial judge failed to satisfactorily explain the requisites of this offence to the jury.43 Bull was acquitted at her second trial.44
Nepoose went missing in 1998, when he was 53 years old. His remains were found near his sister’s home.45 He had suffered from depression, which worsened as he prepared for a civil suit against the RCMP and Corrections Canada.46 This lawsuit has since been settled on confidential terms.47
In 2002, the RCMP apologized to Nepoose’s family in a healing circle ceremony.48 Eight officers involved with the investigation were invited, but none of them attended. Nepoose’s sister-in-law said: “Had they been here, I think the RCMP gesture would have been so much more real.”49
Desjarlais’ murder remains unsolved.