Convicted Nunavut spouse-killer loses appeal

The Nunavut Court of Appeal has upheld Bruce Kayaitok’s 2013 conviction for second degree murder. (FILE PHOTO)

Justice Earl Johnson made no errors in law when in 2013 he found that Bruce Kayaitok, now 39, of Kugaaruk, is guilty of second degree murder in the brutal 2008 killing of his spousal partner, the Nunavut Court of Appeal ruled March 7.

The three-judge panel therefore dismissed an appeal that sought to have Kayaitok found guilty on the lesser charge of manslaughter.

After a prolonged beating, Kayaitok killed Belinda Tootiak, 30, on June 13, 2008 by stabbing her twice in the lower abdomen with the jagged end of a broken mop handle while their two young sons were in the house.

The couple had been together for more 14 years, during which time Kayaitok had been convicted nine times, between 1994 and 2007, for assaulting Tootiak.

Kayaitok did not immediately call for medical help and Tootiak bled to death while he attempted to clean up the mess and hide the weapon he used to kill her.

He attempted to plead guilty to manslaughter in 2013, but the Crown insisted that Kayaitok stand trial for second degree murder.

Following that trial Johnson found him guilty on the murder charge and on March 25, 2014, sentenced Kayaitok to life imprisonment with no eligibility to apply for parole for at least 15 years.

At the time, Johnson said Kayaitok knew what he was doing when he murdered Tootiak and that things he said and did after the killing support the idea that he intentionally killed her.

However, an appeal launched on Kayaitok’s behalf by lawyer James Morton challenged Johnson’s finding that Kayaitok had formed the necessary intent to commit murder and that Johnson was unfairly biased by evidence of his bad character.

Morton also appealed the sentence, saying the 15-year period of parole ineligibility is excessive.

But after hearing the appeal this past Feb. 14, the panel rejected Morton’s arguments and upheld Johnson’s verdict.

“The appellant argues that the trial judge fell into error by inferring guilt because of the accused’s bad character, rather than on his conduct. We disagree,” the three judges said in one section of their judgment.

The panel also rejected the notion that Kayaitok’s sentence is excessive.

“There is no rational basis to conclude that the parole-ineligibility reduction sought by the appellant for this brutal and horrific crime would qualify as a fit sentence,” their judgment said.

2017 NUCA 01 — R. v. Kayaitok by NunatsiaqNews on Scribd