KILLER DAD'S TRIAL RAISES HARD ISSUES

One of the most unsettling high-profile murder trials in years has
ended with the conviction and mandatory sentencing of a man who shot
his daughter's drug-dealing boyfriend in 2003 in Yorkton, Sask.

Kim Walker was immediately sentenced to life and the minimum of 10
years in prison before parole. The defence has indicated it will
appeal on the grounds the judge should not have told the jury it
could not acquit the man, who pumped five rounds into James Hayward,
including one in the back.

Undeniably there are extenuating circumstances enough to tug at the
coldest heart. Walker was concerned that his daughter Jadah, then 16,
was sliding into a serious drug lifestyle as a result of her willing
relationship with Hayward, who was 24 years old.

But observers need to think very carefully indeed before concluding
juries should have latitude to decide a particular killing is
justifiable. Knowing a guilty charge would bring with it a long
mandatory sentence, this particular jury understandably may have
wished a less drastic penalty was available. But it's not hard to
imagine that eventually, acquittals that appear unjust to the average
Canadian would occur for various reasons if that became an option
except in strictly defined circumstances such as self-defence.

Walker's overly zealous efforts to protect his daughter may be an
other excellent example of why mandatory sentences are a bad idea.
But it's hard to imagine how the law would be served if the facts of
this undisputed killing could be set aside entirely.