Felicity Altiman has been found guilty of second-degree murder in the death of Robert ‘Bob’ Keskinen.
Keskinen was stabbed in his Sudbury home more than 103 times, the jury heard and had his genitals mutilated. The incident took place at some point between Dec. 24 and 25, 2020, and his body was discovered on Dec. 26 by a member of his family.
The trial began with jury selection on Oct. 1. After 13 Crown witnesses, but no evidence or testimony from the defence, the six-man and six-woman jury deliberated for 12 hours over two days before they reached a verdict.
Before they reached that verdict, however, the jury came back to the court at approximately 10 a.m. on Oct. 23 with questions for the judge.
Those questions included:
- What does state of mind mean?
- What constitutes reasonable doubt? Does 50 per cent mean beyond a reasonable doubt?
- How far off can theories be made from the facts?
After discussing the answers with counsel, Justice R. Dan Cornell told the jury:
“Before I answer that question, I need to say this. You will not have turned to consider the question about her state of mind unless you've answered question one and unless you have determined that Ms. Altiman murdered Mr. Keskenin. That is the first question. Did she murder him? You only go on to question three and deal with state of mind if you have answered that question.”
He added that once they reached that point, they should turn to the question of her state of mind asking “When she stabbed him, what did she intend to do?”
He said that if the jury believed Altiman didn't kill Keskenin, they should find her not guilty, “but if you find that she did stab him…the only question is, which one is she guilty of, murder or manslaughter?”
In his instructions before the jury’s deliberations, Cornell told members that for them to find Altiman guilty of second-degree murder, Crown counsel must prove each of three essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
- Felicity Altiman caused Robert Keskinen’s death
- Felicity Altman caused Robert Keskinen’s death unlawfully
- Felicity Altman had the state of mind required for murder.
“If Crown Counsel has not satisfied you beyond a reasonable doubt about each of these three essential elements, you must find Ms. Altiman not guilty of second-degree murder,” Cornell told the jury. “If Crown Counsel has satisfied you beyond a reasonable doubt about each of these three essential elements, then you must find Felicity Altiman guilty of second-degree murder.”
But the judge also offered a lesser charge to the jury if they were not satisfied “beyond a reasonable doubt” that Altiman had the required state of mind to commit murder: manslaughter.
The difference between murder and manslaughter, said Cornell, is not easy to define.
“Essentially, it is this: an unlawful act is part of the offence of murder, just as it is part of the offence of manslaughter,” said the judge. “But for murder, the Criminal Code requires that an accused must mean to cause death, or mean to cause bodily harm that the person knows is likely to cause death and to be reckless about whether death occurs or not.”
The commonality is that the law was broken, and someone died in an unlawful way. The difference is that whether there was Intent to cause bodily harm knowing it would likely result in death.
Their verdict sheet, when handed to the judge, allowed for three choices.
- Not guilty of second-degree murder
- Not guilty of second-degree murder, but guilty of manslaughter
- Guilty of second-degree murder
The jury chose guilty as charged.
The Crown called 13 witnesses in their submissions; the defence called none, with defence attorney Stephen Hinkson only speaking to the jury during his closing address.
Like first-degree murder, second-degree murder comes with a minimum sentence of 25 years, but unlike the more serious charge, second-degree offers parole eligibility.
The jury is allowed to make recommendations to the judge on this front, but their recommendation for eligibility can't be lower than 10 years or higher than 25 years. Though some members of the jury declined to make a recommendation, one voted for 10 years before parole eligibility, one for 12 years before, two for 15 years, one for 17 years, two for 20 years and one for 25 years.
Altiman's trial will now move to the sentencing phase. Her lawyer, Stephen Hinkson has requested a pre-sentence report and a Gladue report.
A pre-sentence report is prepared by a probation officer to help the judge decide what sentence to give. The probation officer will interview the offender, the offender’s family, friends, and employer (if they are working). It usually takes between two and six weeks to prepare.
A Gladue report is similar, but specifically used for Indigenous people who have been convicted of a crime.
The next steps will happen in assignment court on November 19, where a date for sentencing will be set.
Jenny Lamothe covers court for Sudbury.com
