Bradley Barton found guilty of manslaughter in death of Cindy GladueLaw & Order | 207181 hits | Feb 19 7:30 pm | Posted by: BeaverFever Commentsview comments in forum Page 1 You need to be a member of CKA and be logged into the site, to comment on news. |
|
She was not a person, She was not a victim. She was a piece of meat.
Warning: This story includes graphic and disturbing details
The family of Cindy Gladue, a 36 year-old Cree-Métis woman whose killer was found guilty last week, wants Alberta's Office of the Chief Medical Examiner to return her remains so they can lay her to rest.
Gladue, a mother of three daughters who now have children of their own, was found dead in an Edmonton hotel room in 2011.
It took two trials and 10 years to convict her killer Bradley Barton, who was found guilty of manslaughter by a jury on Feb. 19.
Gladue's family has written to the province's chief medical examiner to return the part of her body used as evidence during the first trial of Barton, a chain-smoking, Mississauga, Ont., truck driver, who was initially found not guilty by a jury of first-degree murder and manslaughter charges in 2015.
The use of Gladue's body part as evidence was the first time in Canadian courtroom history that preserved human tissue was used in a trial. It sent shockwaves — and has been called both a "barbaric" indignity and an example of systemic racism in the justice system.
Prairie Adaoui, 41, Gladue's cousin, said the family wants to say their final goodbyes, but can't until they retrieve her remains which are still under the responsibility of the province's medical examiner's officer.
"It's been 10 years. My cousin, part of her remains are still locked away. We haven't been able to get closure, go to ceremony," said Adaoui.
"I think that's wrong.... We haven't been able to lay her to rest because she's still sitting somewhere."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/glad ... -1.5928803
The use of Gladue's body part as evidence was the first time in Canadian courtroom history that preserved human tissue was used in a trial. It sent shockwaves — and has been called both a "barbaric" indignity and an example of systemic racism in the justice system.
Because tissue retention used to be more common in the past than it is now. Specimens were often retained by forensic pathologists which wouldn’t be produced in the courtroom but would be available if experts from either side wanted to review the case. There are more prosaic examples. Say a healthy person dies suddenly after a medical procedure and the pathologist finds an organ that looks like it was damaged by the physician. At least the affected part of that organ, e.g. a large blood vessel, bowel segment, or spleen, could be retained by the pathologist and fixed in formalin for documentary purposes. However, retention on the scale described in this criminal case is more difficult to explain.