Officer’s widow weeps as Jaw gets life

GREG YOUNGER-LEWIS

CAPE DORSET – Salomonie Jaw, who killed RCMP Constable Jurgen Seewald with one blast from a shotgun during an early-morning struggle at the home of his common-law wife, was sentenced this week to a life term with no possibility of parole for 25 years.

Seewald’s widow and daughter, who came to Cape Dorset for the trial, clasped hands and wept silently when the verdict by a 12-member jury finding Jaw guilty of first degree murder was read. Later, mother and daughter said they did not wish to comment on the outcome of the trial, which has overshadowed every other event in the community since it began in late January.

The family of Jaw, 49, showed no such reticence. Immediately after the sentenced was passed, his mother, sisters and other family members formed a circle around Jaw and wailed. His brother, Pootoogook Jaw, said his family was praying for everyone involved, including Seewald’s widow, daughter and other survivors.

“I believe as an Inuk it is my culture to feel sorry for both sides in a big event – not siding up on each side, especially if it was a tragedy,” he said.

Jaw himself accepted the verdict in silence. Before being led to a room at the back of the building to talk with his lawyers, Jaw, clad in a leather jacket, sat quietly.

When he emerged from his discussion with his lawyers, he bowed his head as friends and family huddled around him.

An RCMP official praised the verdict. “We placed our faith in the community and they came to what we felt was an appropriate decision,” said Inspector Doug Reti, criminal operations officer for Nunavut. “This was a very difficult time for the community, the family and the police officers, and no doubt for the jurors, too.”

Seewald, 47, was the first RCMP officer killed in the North in 25 years. In 1979, two Mounties stationed in Cape Dorset drowned during a walrus hunt outside the community.

At the insistence of defence lawyer Susan Cooper, Justice John Vertes asked each jury member if the verdict they had reached was that Jaw was guilty of first degree murder. Each in turn confirmed their verdict, some of them sniffling and shaking.

Besides a skeleton of agreed facts, the jury was offered two versions of the fatal night, which Cooper described as a tragic accident and the Crown argued was deliberate murder.

On March 5, 2001, Seewald, a peacekeeper in the former Yugoslavia and 26-year veteran with the Mounties, responded to a late-night 911 call from Jaw’s common-law wife, who told a dispatcher Jaw was threatening violence, had guns, and was refusing to leave their bungalow apartment.

During his testimony, Jaw admitted he took his 12-gauge shotgun out of the closet near the front door while waiting for the police. But he said he was showing the gun to his partner, Barbara Ettinger, in hopes of ending their weekend of arguing. He said he was calm and didn’t intend to shoot anybody.

Jaw also stated clearly that he did not load the gun. While handling it though, a shell dropped on the floor, and he said he remembered either putting it or another shell into the magazine.

However, during cross-examination, Jaw said that in order to have shot the officer, he would have had to press the gun’s safety release, pump the action of the gun and pull the trigger.

After the officer arrived, he told Jaw to sit down, then pushed him into a chair when he refused. Ettinger saw a rip in his T-shirt, and retrieved a new one in the bedroom.

When she returned, the officer was attempting subdue Jaw by blasting pepper spray in his face.

Next, she saw the two men wrestling toward the front-door past the closet where the gun was, and somehow ending up in a tug-of-war over the gun in the hallway. Jaw held the stock, she said. The officer held the barrel.

After the shot, the officer lay on the floor, and Jaw turned to his partner and said “I shot him” before putting on his jacket, and walking past the dying officer to leave the apartment.

However, an RCMP arms expert said the tug-of-war scenario couldn’t have caused an accidental shooting. After analyzing the gunshot residue and pattern of shred marks left on the officer’s jacket, Al Voth said Seewald was not holding the gun when it was fired. Instead, Voth estimated the officer must have been two to five feet away.

Voth also found the gun was working properly, and could not have gone off accidentally. Someone must have pulled the trigger, he said.

In her final arguments, Crown lawyer Judy Hartling described Jaw as someone who knew how to handle guns. She said he intentionally aimed at the officer and pulled the trigger.

Speaking in Inuktitut to the jury, Jaw admitted he had shot the officer, but said he couldn’t remember how it happened.

Hartling suggested Jaw was using his alleged memory loss as a “convenience,” and attacked his testimony, pointing out several contradictions.

Cooper questioned the expert’s testimony, pointing to his omission of a standard lead test done for gunpowder on the jacket. The jury should also doubt his testimony, Cooper said, because police investigators mishandled the jacket when they placed it under the body, instead of in a separate plastic bag, the usual procedure with evidence.