by Greg Marquis
In a media interview Allan Gold described the result as “bittersweet” for his client; although it was “nice to be vindicated” through the legal process, Dennis had been subjected to “many months in custody, unnecessarily.” The defence also confirmed that it was continuing to prepare its application to the SCC for a cross appeal of the original 2015 conviction. As expected, a key issue for Oland’s lawyers was Justice Walsh’s refusal to exclude the results of DNA testing of the brown jacket. No media stories that day or the next pointed out the obvious: if Oland had not spent several months in the maximum-security penitentiary at Renous, he would have avoided having to live with hardened offenders, including convicted murderers, and experiencing the alleged assault at the hands of two younger inmates. “Team Oland” also made one of its periodic public pronouncements: Derek Oland issued the following statement: “We are pleased with today’s Supreme Court ruling and continue to believe Dennis is innocent.”22 There was no statement from Dennis, who had been a partially free man (on bail conditions) for nearly five months.
Coincidentally, two days after the Supreme Court decision a story on Moosehead appeared the Globe and Mail’s business section. It reported that Moosehead sales were flat and that the company was caught in a squeeze between huge multinational brewing corporations and the growing craft-beer sector. Derek Oland, the sole shareholder as of 2007, supposedly was in the processing of distributing shares to his children, hopefully with the aim of avoiding the sibling rivalry that has plagued the family firm for generations. The tragedy of Richard’s death and the looming second trial for Dennis were mentioned as serious issues for the family. The article stated that Derek and his wife had raised their sons to have respect for one another, something that had been lacking at times between Derek and his brother Dick. In his interview for the story, Derek made the following extraordinary statement: “We are convinced, absolutely convinced, that he [Dennis] had nothing to do with it…He’s an innocent man that happened to be the last known person to have seen my brother. But we know that he wasn’t the last person. So what we are doing is we are defending him and supporting him in every way we can. It was not well investigated.” As discussed earlier in the book, when presenting its case in 2015 the Oland defence had promised the jury to show that its client had not been the last person to see his father on the night of his death. Yet Gary Miller had failed to deliver on this promise. Derek Oland’s March 2017 interview raises the obvious question: does the Oland family know something about the events of July 6, 2011, that has not been revealed to the public? At this point, it appears that the ruling could remain one of the Supreme Court's more obscure.
The Supreme Court of Canada website revealed in late March that the Oland legal team had officially filed for leave to cross appeal. A media report indicated that the lawyers were seeking an acquittal based on the argument that the 2015 jury decision had been an “unreasonable verdict.” Much like the Crown’s application for appeal, the defence tried to convince the Supreme Court justices that the Oland case had raised issues of national importance that had to be clarified for the sake of the justice system. One ground was that the decision in 2015 to admit into evidence various forensic tests affected the “privacy interests” of citizens.23 There is no guarantee that the SCC, if it heard Oland’s cross appeal, would accept arguments on the points raised. But this bid may be worthwhile if it leads to a second trial, where key pieces of Crown evidence were initially excluded.
Conclusion
The Oland case, now approaching its sixth year, retains its hold on the public imagination in New Brunswick and beyond. Part of this stems from the unique circumstances of the murder, controversies surrounding the investigation, and the powerful role of media in influencing public opinion. According to St. Thomas University criminologist Michael Boudreau, the media is attracted to violent crime as it can be sensationalized and is easy to cover. Violent crime affecting wealthy people is even more of a draw.24 In February 2017, CBC’s The Fifth Estate featured an updated version of “Murder in the Family,” a somewhat superficial overview that in the eyes of many leaned heavily in favour of Dennis Oland’s guilt. Once again, the show relied on out-of-province expert commentators. Yet media coverage alone cannot explain how the murder of Richard Oland and the arrest, trial, conviction, and release from penitentiary of his son became a social phenomenon. Perhaps, it was a welcome distraction from the stark realities of Saint John’s economy. Reporting on the case was fairly balanced, but the amount of detail dedicated to allegations of police incompetence challenges a common assumption of academics that the mainstream news media need “to be more critical of the criminal justice system.”25 When the legal process finally concludes, reporters may embark on a more searching look at the case that goes beyond police missteps. The SJPF is still smarting from the embarrassing revelations of 2016, and the New Brunswick Police Commission, in theory, is still planning to look into how the department investigated the Oland file, but this, if it ever happens, may not take place for a few years. One obvious target for investigative journalism would be a closer look at Richard Oland’s financial transactions and interpersonal relations. Did he have any irate clients or business partners? Had he been involved romantically with any other women? The movie-of-the-week explanation of murder rests on three things: love, money, and revenge. Public opinion notwithstanding, in a court of law the only opinion that matters is that of the jury or the judge trying the case. In 2018 or 2019, a new jury guided by a new judge will be exposed to basically the same evidence as in the 2015 trial. What it will decide is anyone’s guess.
To date, the larger Oland family and their friends and associates appear outwardly unanimous in their belief in Dennis’s innocence, and this, no doubt, brings some comfort to the immediate family. Much depends on the outcome of legal proceedings in the future; if Dennis is again convicted of second-degree murder, family members may experience not only shock and anger, but also shame, anxiety, and depression. Dennis would be close to sixty years of age if he secured parole at the earliest chance. In the wake of the March 23 Supreme Court ruling, Oland’s lawyers spoke of its quest to seek the “complete vindication” of Dennis, despite the fact that the high court’s ruling has nothing to do with innocence or guilt. Given their resources and connections, the family may not experience the social isolation and loss of economic security so often the fate of the families of convicted murderers. If Dennis is acquitted of killing his father, there is always the chance that even in the protective environment of Rothesay, he, similar to other well-known defendants acquitted of serious offences, may always live under a cloud of notoriety and suspicion. In other words, the Olands, and the public, may never get closure on this story.26 In the meantime, he will probably stay close to his family and enjoy daily life as much as he can and try not to think about losing nine years of his freedom to federal penitentiary. During the summer months, Dennis is likely to launch his cabin cruiser, kept in dry storage at the Saint John Power Boat Club since 2015, so that he can moor it at the Rothesay Yacht Club and relax with family and friends on the beautiful St. John and Kennebecasis Rivers. The same waters his murdered father knew so well.
* * *
1Oland v. R, 2016 NBCA 58, paragraph 3.
2Ibid, paragraph 6.
3Interview with Nicole O’Byrne, Feb. 28, 2017.
4Terry Skolnik, The Jury System in Canada, 2, Jucio por Jurado, n.d., Available online at: http://www.sistemasjudiciales.org/content/jud/archivos/notaarchivo/947.pdf.
5R v. Jordan, 2016 SCC 27.
6Curtis Bonnell v. R, 2015, NBCA 6, paragraphs 12-20.
7NBCA, Oland appeal, Oct. 20, 2016.
8In the opinion of David Lutz, issues in the first trial such as the bathroom and the back door were “red herrings”: Interview with David Lutz, Jan. 30, 2017.
9R. v. Grandinetti, [2005] 1 S.C.R. 27, 2005.
&nbs
p; 10Bob Holiday, “Top Cop Blows His Top Over Lawyer’s Charges,” Winnipeg Sun, Oct. 3, 2002, 4; Sher and Marsden, The Road to Hell, 295-97.
11Mike Landry, “Oland wants top court to review his case,” Telegraph Journal, Jan. 25, 2017, A2. See also, John Mastrangelo, “R v Oland: Why Dennis Oland Got a New Trial,” TheCourt.ca, Nov. 5, 2016: http://www.thecourt.ca/r-v-oland-dennis-oland-got-new-trial/.
12Oland v. R., 2016 NBCA 58, paragraph 10.
13Ibid., paragraphs 38, 44, and 82.
14NBCA, Oland appeal, Oct. 19, 2016.
15Interview with Nicole O’Byrne, Feb. 28, 2017.
16Kevin Bissett, “N.B. Crown to appeal ruling overturning Dennis Oland’s murder conviction,” Stratford Beacon-Herald, Jan. 4, 2017, A8.
17Communication, N. Archambault-Chapleau to author, Feb. 21, 2017.
18Dennis James Oland v. Her Majesty the Queen and Attorney General of Ontario, Attorney General of British Columbia, Attorney General of Alberta and Criminal Lawyers Association (Ontario), 2017 SCC 117, n.p.
19Ibid., paragraphs 29, 33, 44, and 49.
20Ibid., paragraph 65.
21CTV Atlantic News, March 23, 2017.
22Ibid.
23Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon, “5 reasons Supreme Court should acquit Denis Oland of Murder, defence argues,” CBC News New Brunswick, March 29, 2017.
24Interview with Michael Boudreau, Feb. 17, 2017.
25Chris McCormick, “Conclusion,” in Chris McCormick ed. Constructing Danger: The Mis/Representation of Crime in the News (Halifax: Fernwood Publishing, 1995), 223.
26There may be parallels with the case of Gerald Regan, the former premier of Nova Scotia who was accused of multiple sexual-assault charges. Defended by well-known lawyer Eddie Greenspan, Regan was acquitted of all charges in 1998, but his reputation in the eyes of many never recovered: Stephen Kimber, Not Guilty: The Trial of Gerald Regan (Toronto: Stoddart, 1999).
Related Images
Richard Oland in a happy moment in February 2011, a few months before he was murdered, wearing his Royal Kennebecasis Yacht Club blazer.
Sail Canada
Fifty-two Canterbury Street. Printing Plus is shown in front-centre, and the entrance to the Far End Corporation is on the far left.
Kâté Braydon
Panoramic shot of the lobby outside Far End Corporation, including rear-exit door (left).
Court Office Photos
The victim’s desk the day after the murder.
Court Office Photos
Floor plan of murder scene, with victim’s body depicted in upper right.
Court Office Photos
The victim’s blood-soaked shirt, which was covered by a sweater.
Court Office Photos
Exterior of the rear-exit door and rear alley at 52 Canterbury Street.
Court Office Photos
A drywall hammer with cross-hatch pattern on blunt surface.
Kâté Braydon
Dennis Oland approaching the Saint John Law Courts during the trial.
Kâté Braydon
The trial’s key exhibit: Dennis Oland’s Hugo Boss sports coat.
Court Office Photos
The home of Dennis and Lisa Oland, 58 Gondola Point Road, Rothesay.
Kâté Braydon
Diana Sedlacek, left, leaving the Saint John Law Courts after testifying on Tuesday, November 10, 2015.
Canadian Press, photographer Andrew Vaughan
Defence lawyers (L–R) Garry Miller, QC, Alan Gold, James MConnell, and William (Bill) Teed, QC.
Kâté Braydon
Crown attorneys (L–R) Paul (P. J.) Veniot, QC, Derek Weaver, and Patrick Wilbur.
Kâté Braydon
Overhead view of the area surrounding the crime scene, including the rear alley.
Jim Turnbull
Artist’s rendering of the jury in Dennis Oland’s murder trial.
Carol Taylor
Artist’s rendering of Justice John (Jack) Walsh during Oland trial.
Carol Taylor
