Accused murderer found guilty of Manslaughter
In the Supreme Court, a conviction stuns the courtroom. Gary Gabourel was shot and killed in front of his wife and children on March twenty fifth of 2007. The gunman was later identified as Stewart Sutherland. Sutherland reportedly claimed that he shot Gabourel once with his sixteen gauge shot gun then fled the scene of the crime. And why did Sutherland kill the family man? In a caution statement, Sutherland said that Gabourel accused him of trying to steal a race saddle. He believed Gabourel would have wanted revenge, so he shot him. But on the witness stand, Sutherland denied giving police such a statement, and said he was forced to do so by police. Also taking the witness stand was Topia Smith, Gabourel’s wife. She said they were at the family farm when Sutherland showed up and got in an argument with her husband. Gabourel asked her to go inside with the children. She said that when she looked through a window of the house she saw Sutherland lift up a gun aimed and shot her husband in cold blood. She saw when her husband fell against their car and slumped to the ground on his face. This afternoon a jury of twelve found Sutherland guilty of manslaughter, not murder. Crown Counsel Cecil Ramirez was the prosecutor in the case. He called ten witnesses to testify and he along with family members are all shocked at the manslaughter verdict. His sentencing is slated for the twenty seventh of October.
Cecil Ramirez, Senior Crown Counsel D.P.P. Office
“Well at four o’clock when the jury came out they were asked whether or not they were unanimous in respect to the indictment or charge of murder and they said they were not unanimous. They said they wanted more time. The judge then said that they could get more time. Then they were called out for an explanation of the law, which is that if you are unanimous—this is section twenty-one of the Jury’s Act which says that if you are not unanimous within four hours, then you may consider Manslaughter and if you have a majority verdict then you could say whether the person is guilty or not guilty. That is what I understood the judge to tell them. I don’t understand that they were directed to come with manslaughter. And then when they came back after some time, they were asked if they were unanimous as to murder, then they said yes. And then when they retired again and when they came back the judge then indicated that they were directed to consider manslaughter because they had been in deliberation for four hours. They were then ordered to bring a formal verdict of not guilty for Murder and whatsoever they decided on Manslaughter, which they said guilty. That is the chronology of what happened as far as I understand it.”
Karen Gabourel, Sister of Deceased
“Well the jurors came back and found him guilty of murder. The judge came back and told them that she wanted a sentence of Manslaughter. So clearly we see that the justice system has failed us again.”
Sutherland was also accused of shooting Evan “Duck “ Garnett some years ago.
