The Supreme Court of Canada has ordered an acquittal for a Cranbrook woman in the case of a toddler who drowned while under her care in 2011. This decision clears Tammy Bouvette’s criminal conviction, ending a decade-long legal battle.
Bouvette initially faced a second-degree murder charge but pleaded guilty to criminal negligence causing death. She was sentenced to 12 months in prison and probation.
Years later, a special prosecutor reviewed the case and recommended a court review. The review found that the Crown had failed to disclose key evidence before Bouvette’s guilty plea. This included an external peer review of the child’s autopsy, which questioned the forensic pathologist’s conclusions as unreasonable.
In 2021, Bouvette formally requested the courts to vacate her guilty plea, quash her conviction, and enter an acquittal. The B.C. Court of Appeal quashed her conviction in 2023 but ordered a stay of proceedings instead of an acquittal. A stay halts criminal proceedings without declaring a person not guilty, whereas an acquittal is a formal not-guilty finding.
The Supreme Court’s decision was unanimous in favor of acquittal, though the nine justices differed on the legal reasoning.
Justice Nicholas Kasirer, representing five judges, noted that a retrial would likely result in acquittal because the Crown stated it would not present evidence. He wrote, “The Crown’s position is therefore plain that it would invite the trial court to acquit. Rather than forcing the parties to go through pro forma proceedings to achieve this result… the just result is for the acquittal to be entered now.”
Justice Sheilah Martin, writing for four concurring justices, emphasized that the remedies available favored an acquittal. She said, “Based on a consideration of all the relevant factors, the interests of justice dictate an acquittal, not a stay of proceedings. It is more likely than not that Ms. Bouvette would be acquitted at a new trial. This final order also alleviates the unfairness and stigma caused by this miscarriage of justice.”
The case highlights critical issues in criminal law, including the disclosure of evidence by the Crown. Legal experts say that failing to provide key evidence before a plea can undermine the fairness of a trial and can lead to convictions being overturned years later.
Bouvette’s case has been closely followed in Canada because it raises questions about how the legal system handles evidence in serious criminal cases. The external peer review that contradicted the original autopsy played a pivotal role in challenging the conviction.
The Supreme Court’s ruling ensures that Bouvette is formally recognized as not guilty, bringing closure to a case that has spanned more than a decade. The decision also underscores the importance of proper legal procedures and transparency in criminal trials.
Legal analysts note that acquittals, especially after long legal battles, are rare and typically reflect significant procedural errors or miscarriages of justice. In this instance, the failure to disclose the autopsy review was considered a serious oversight by the Crown, justifying the Supreme Court’s order.
The ruling serves as a reminder that criminal justice systems must balance the pursuit of accountability with fairness for defendants. The acquittal formally removes any criminal record for Bouvette and ends the legal proceedings related to the 2011 toddler drowning.
Bouvette’s legal team called the Supreme Court’s decision a long-awaited relief. They noted that the acquittal not only corrects the injustice but also restores her public standing and personal dignity, which were deeply affected by the wrongful conviction.
The Supreme Court’s ruling will likely be cited in future cases where undisclosed evidence may have influenced a guilty plea. It sets a precedent for how courts may handle claims of miscarriage of justice when procedural errors are identified long after a conviction.
