Nunavut appeal court tosses Rankin man’s second murder conviction

Adrian Van Eindhoven on Oct. 15, 2013 after an Iqaluit jury convicted him for the 2004 murder of his spouse in Rankin Inlet. He was sentenced Dec. 9 to life in prison with no chance of parole for at least 13 years. But the Nunavut Court of Appeal has just overturned that 2013 conviction. (FILE PHOTO)

(Updated May 11, 9:30 a.m.)

The Nunavut Court of Appeal has overturned Adrian Van Eindhoven’s 2013 second degree murder conviction in the 2004 stabbing death of his common-law spouse, Leanne Irkotee, in Rankin Inlet.

While reading the unanimous decision, reached by a three-judge panel, in an Iqaluit courtroom May 10, Alberta Justice Jack Watson said Van Eindhoven’s 2013 trial “foundered on a number of interlocking errors,” resulting in “a miscarriage of justice.”

The judge presiding over that trial, Earl Johnson, erred in his instructions to the jury before their deliberations by providing information that was “not accurate,” nor complete, Watson said.

That means there was a “serious risk the jury didn’t understand,” key aspects of what they had to deliberate on, Watson said.

“We are persuaded that this is a situation wherein a new trial should follow,” Watson said.

Van Eindhoven has been found guilty twice of the second-degree murder of Irkotee after inflicting a savage beating on her, but both of those verdicts have now been successfully appealed.

In the course of the first two trials, Van Eindhoven admitted to viciously beating Irkotee, which witnesses said left her blood and hair on his boots, before a single knife wound to Irkotee’s heart killed her in September 2004.

Van Eindhoven was arrested shortly after police found Irkotee’s body, but testified in his 2013 trial that Irkotee fell on the knife while trying to stab him.

One of the main problems at the 2013 trial, Watson said, was a false choice presented by Crown prosecutors and echoed by Johnson to the jury: namely that if the jury found that Van Eindhoven stabbed Irkotee, then Van Eindhoven must be guilty of murder.

But that choice, which Watson called “the distorted Crown’s theme,” leaves out the possibility of manslaughter, which includes a killing in which the killer cannot form the intention to kill.

For example, the trial judge did not explain that high levels of intoxication or extreme emotional upset can mean the difference between murder — which is intentional — and manslaughter, which can be accidental, Watson said.

Both Van Eindhoven and Irkotee were intoxicated at the time of the incident and had been fighting, according to trial testimony.

And Watson said neither the Crown nor the judge explained to the jury that it was up to prosecutors to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Van Eindhoven could form the intent to commit murder.

In addition, Watson said Crown prosecutors uttered “misstatements of evidence, offerings of speculation… personal opinions and generalities about social attitudes.”

Johnson’s instructions to the jury to ignore the inappropriate comments by prosecutors were not only “inadequate” but likely added to the misinformation presented by the Crown, Watson said.

Another important mistake made by Johnson in his instructions to the jury concerns trial testimony that Van Eindhoven was overheard by a police officer to have said “I killed her,” referring to Irkotee.

Prosecutors used that testimony to infer Van Eindhoven admitted to the murder.

But Johnson should have reminded the jury that saying “I killed her” does not necessarily mean Van Eindhoven killed Irkotee.

“A person might manifest a sense of responsibility in excess of their actual level of guilt,” Watson said.

“In result, the conviction for murder cannot stand,” Watson said.

After Watson read the appeal courts findings, Van Eindhoven, who looked tired with bags under his eyes, white streaks at the temples of his black hair and wearing standard-issued BCC sweat suit, stood up and shook hands with his defence lawyer, Rob Nuttal.

Watson said the appeals court can accept an application for a bail review hearing on behalf of Van Eindhoven, which may then be deferred to a trial judge.

It is unlikely Van Eindhoven will be granted bail, but will remain in custody at the Baffin Correctional Centre until that hearing.