Law expert weighs in on Peeteetuce and Taypotat sentences

Watch above: Days after two offenders in separate fatal drunk driving crash cases were in court, the sentencing differences are still sinking in. Wendy Winiewski finds out how family members are reacting and speaks with a legal expert.

SASKATOON – Tuesday new federal legislation was proposed to create tougher penalties for drunk drivers who kill people. Had the legislation been in place sooner, it may have affected the outcome of two cases before the courts in Saskatoon Friday.

In court on June 12, Cheyann Peeteetuce received a six-year sentence. Peeteetuce has already served one year and eight months, so time remaining to serve is four years and four months.

READ MORE: Drunk driver of stolen truck gets six years for killing two teens

She’s responsible for driving a stolen truck that crashed on May 5, 2014 at the intersection of 22nd Street West and Avenue M. Peeteetuce hit a vehicle there pinning it against a building, instantly killing James Haughey and Sarah Wensley, both 17. A third teen in the backseat by the name of Kara Mitsuing was seriously injured and sustained over 30 fractures.

Blaine Taypotat was also sentenced Friday. He received 9 1/2 years for impaired driving causing the death of conservation officer Justin Knackstedt on May 31, 2013.

READ MORE: 9.5 years for driver who killed conservation officer

The bill introduced Tuesday by the federal government creates a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for impaired driving causing death. It won’t pass before Parliament rises for the summer but Justice Minister Peter MacKay said bringing it forward now is better than not at all.

“Could we and should have we done it sooner? Probably,” MacKay admitted.

With a federal election expected to be called in fall, MacKay hopes the bill will be considered by future governments.

“We’ve heard far too often the trail of heart break, the stories, the devastation that impaired drivers inflict on victims,” said MacKay.

It’s something families of the local victims spoke about outside court Friday. Dave Wensley, father of Sarah Wensley, feels cheated.

“Where is our justice system? Where is our justice,” he asked.

READ MORE: Two years after promising tougher drunk driving laws, Tories introduce new plan

According to Kim Pate, the Sallows Chair of Saskatchewan Human Rights and a professor at the University of Saskatchewan’s College of Law, longer sentences provide a false sense of healing.

“We’re encouraged to believe that will somehow make us feel better,” she said.

“I don’t know any victims who five, 10, 15 years down the track will say ‘if we put everybody in jail forever, that we will feel better and that somehow it will compensate for our loss.”

Tweet This Click to share quote on Twitter: "I don't know any victims who five, 10, 15 years down the track will say 'if we put everybody in jail forever, that we will feel better and that somehow it will compensate for our loss."

With the Peeteetuce and Taypotat cases being so similar in nature and both concluding on the same day – the contrast between sentences is duly noted by the public on social media.

Professor of criminal law Sarah Burningham reminds the public “she was sentenced for each victim, but the sentences were served concurrently so they’ll be served at the same time.”

Burningham admits concurrent sentencing, in comparison to consecutive sentencing, may seem unfair but notes it plays an important role in Canadian law.

“You might have a situation where you have several crimes arising from the same incident, several offences and once you stack all those sentences together, you might end up with a very disproportionate sentence.”

These situations are avoided with concurrent sentencing, explained Burningham.

The Crown and the defence for both Peeteetuce’s case and Taypotat’s case have 30 days to appeal.