Lawyers were in a Regina courtroom on Thursday, arguing whether a conviction in the 2019 death of Sheena Billette should stand or be tossed out.
Deborah McKenzie was sentenced to just over five and a half years in prison after being convicted of manslaughter in connection with Billette’s death in La Ronge.
McKenzie’s legal team is asking Saskatchewan’s highest court to either acquit her or order a new trial.
However, Crown prosecutors maintain the original judge got it right, and the conviction should stay.
MBC News received the written legal arguments from both the Crown and defence and here is a breakdown of the two major issues argued before the Court of Appeal—and what both sides had to say.
One of the key arguments from the defence was that McKenzie was not given the right to a trial within a reasonable amount of time. McKenzie’s lawyers say the original judge made a mistake by blaming the defense for several months of delays. Part of that time included four and a half months when the prosecutor’s office hired a defense lawyer who had previously represented a co-accused, creating a legal conflict of interest. The defense argues that if you don’t count that conflict against them, the total wait time blew past the 30-month limit.
Meanwhile, prosecutors argue that the timing of the trial remained fair and reasonable under the law. The Crown maintains that the schedule reflected the natural complexities of a multi-accused homicide case and that the delays in question were properly factored into the trial judge’s original calculations.
The second major issue revolves around how the trial judge handled testimony from a key witness.
McKenzie’s lawyers argue the judge made a legal error by using physical evidence—such as vehicle movements, cut-up clothing, and a palm print on packing tape—to back up the witness testimony. The defense says those items didn’t actually prove the story on its own.
Prosecutors countered that argument and say the trial judge acted fully within the law when weighing the evidence. The Crown maintains that the physical items and timeline evidence provided solid, independent support for the witness’s overall story, giving the trial judge plenty of reliable grounds to find McKenzie guilty.
The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal has reserved its decision, meaning the panel of judges will review the arguments and issue a written ruling at a later date.
(TOP PHOTO – Sheena Billette)