It was a long, teary-eyed walk for Karen and Doug Reimer from the attorney general’s office Thursday morning, after a plea for an independent, third-party review of a court decision was rejected.
Just over two years ago, their daughter Jordyn Reimer, 24, was killed in a crash involving a drunk driver, Tyler Scott Goodman.
During a trial last fall, the court heard Goodman had blown through two stop signs before hitting Jordyn’s vehicle at a speed more than double the limit.
While Goodman, and his mother, have been prosecuted, the passenger alleged to have handed Goodman the keys to his car has not.
“He may as well have handed him the bullet to load the gun and shoot somebody. And nobody will convince me that if it was a gun and a bullet, that that accomplice would not be prosecuted,” Jordyn’s mom, Karen, said.
The Reimers have been advocating to see that decision re-visited with a third party, independent review, but after meeting with justice minister Matt Wiebe, were told that’s not going to happen.
“That should be a disappointment to all the people of Manitoba that this government talks about getting tough on crime, but when push comes to shove, they back away from the table,” Doug, Jordyn’s dad, said.
“I don’t know why there’s such a resistance to order an independent review. If you have nothing to worry about and your decision is sound, you should feel confident that someone else will corroborate,” Karen said.
Wiebe said his office took all the evidence under consideration, and brought new prosecutors in to evaluate it.
“Ultimately, the decision that was made by our prosecutors is one that is supported by the facts and supported by the circumstances of the case,” he said.
But Reimers are concerned, as he conducted the evaluation internally.
“To me, that is a huge conflict of interest to go back and say, ‘Well, we asked other people that (the initial prosecutors) work with, and they would agree,'” Karen said.
“We’re angry. We’re very disappointed in the fact that (he’s) just consulting the same people,” Doug added. “That’s not an independent review. That’s not that’s not a true consultation.”
Both cited an independent review under the former PC government that resulted in charges against Peter Nygard, a disgraced fashion mogul now behind bars for sexual assault.
“We know that review said the prosecutor’s office made a mistake. They needed to prosecute. They changed their minds and prosecuted. We are just asking for the same justice for Jordan, that she has the opportunity to have the person who aided and abetted her death be held accountable for his crime,” Karen said.
“I just don’t have an explanation for why they will not proceed.”
Wiebe said he can’t comment on why a review was undertaken for the Nygard case, but said “it was very important for us to be very thorough and clear in the process that was undertaken here.”
Tanya Hansen Pratt, national president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) Canada, said the organization also carries some frustration knowing someone enabled an impaired driver.
“If you’re enabling someone to drive impaired, that … can have the exact same tragic consequences as if you were the driver yourself,” she said.
But Hansen Pratt believes the province has operated in good faith.
She did say MADD was in support of a third-party review.
“There certainly would be no harm in a third-party review. I think that would definitely have helped give the Reimers a sense of closure just to know that every avenue had been pursued,” she said.
Moving forward, Wiebe said his office is collaborating with MADD and other advocates on developing new legislation, but couldn’t say what it would look like.
“We’re going to use this tragedy to further our impaired driving legislation in this province, to (prevent) this from happening ever again to any other family,” he said.
That’s all the Reimers want.
“The only thing that’s important is saving other people’s lives and getting justice for Jordan, because Jordan deserves it,” Karen said.
She said she and Doug will try to connect with Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew next, to see what else can be done.
“Somebody has to be the precedent setter in order for there to be precedent that will send a message… to people that deterrence has to happen,” Doug said.