An Alberta Judge ruled in favour of the defendants in a murder charge because the medical examiner who performed the autopsy had an accent that he didn’t much care for.   

I’m serious.  This happened. 

The CBC reported that Justice Terry Clackson ruled in favour of David and Collet Stephan, who were being charged with “not providing the necessaries of life” for their 19-month-old son Ezekiel.  They thought the child had croup and treated him with herbal remedies, but he later died in hospital.

   Dr. Bamidele Adeagbo, who is originally from Nigeria, declared the boy died from bacterial meningitis.  The defence’s medical expert had a French accent, and is a woman, so maybe Judge Clackson is personally into that, or at the very least, he identifies it as “more Canadian.”  If either are true, then it’s safe to say his judgement is a little off and for a judge, that’s no bueno.

I say this because these were the words of Justice Clackson regarding why he sided with the defence: 

Of Dr. Adeagbo, “His ability to articulate his thoughts in an understandable fashion was severely compromised by: his garbled enunciation; his failure to use appropriate endings for plurals and past tenses; his failure to use the appropriate definite and indefinite articles; his repeated emphasis of the wrong syllables; dropping his Hs; mispronouncing his vowels; and the speed of his responses,” Clackson wrote in the decision.” 

If that’s not some unnecessarily racist shit I don’t know what is.  As a judge, you should be able to judge a person’s intelligence by how they speak regardless of their accent.  You should be able to do so as a mildly intelligent person regardless of your occupation.  Just because someone’s first language is something other than English, does not mean they are intellectually inferior, and if you think that, you’re a racist too, even if you don’t mean to be.  There are dozens of racist perspectives held by seemingly nice people whose hearts are not filled with hate.  Rather, they’ve been indoctrinated with propaganda by the ruling class.   

As far as the parent’s responsibility in the death of their child, it seems they were perhaps negligent in seeking the appropriate medical attention. This is a tough one because I don’t believe they ever intended to harm their child, and they’re probably grieving and feel guilty about their child’s death.  But at what point do you punish people for their beliefs?  Or their ignorance?  Or their stupidity?   Certainly, when it results in the harm of another – especially a helpless child – seems to be a good starting point.  Or perhaps prior to the harm being done if we want to be preventative.  But that brings with it a whole slew of ethical dilemmas. 

I’m no judge so maybe that question isn’t for me to answer.   

Justice Terry Clackson’s poor judgement of an expert medical examiner influenced by his own racist tendencies suggests that maybe he’s no judge either.   

You are dismissed.

Gonzo