GUILTY Canada - Renee Sweeney, 23, murdered, Sudbury, Ont, 27 Jan 1998 *arrest in 2018*

[Gina20]

View attachment 411922

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/sudbury/ren%C3%A9e-sweeney-murder-trial-verdict-1.6795106

''Steven Wright has been found guilty of stabbing 23-year-old Renée Sweeney to death in a Sudbury video store on Jan. 27, 1998.

The jury delivered its verdict in the Sudbury courthouse on Wednesday afternoon, after deliberating for a little more than a day.

A cheer went up from the side of the courtroom where the Sweeney family was sitting and people hugged each other with tears in their eyes.

There were also tears in the eyes of Wright's mother as she watched her 43-year-old son be led out of the courtroom by police officers.''

Renee's mother and stepfather were not there to cry for their murdered 23-year-old daughter. They died before justice could be served.

 

[Gina20]

Not that it really matters but there are meters on both sides, the ones on the courthouse side are a little farther away from the lights and closer to the jail.

In any case, it seems Kim Sweeney did not break any laws.

 

[Gina20]

Shortly after 4:30 p.m., the jury returned to the courtroom to deliver its recommendations of Wright serve 20 to 25 years in custody before he is eligible for parole, less time served in pre-trial custody.

Gordon released the jury and reminded members it is against the law to talk about anything that was discussed during deliberations with anyone unless called to testify in court.

Defence attorney Michael Lacy told CTV News Wright will appeal the conviction.

Robert Steven Wright found guilty in Renee Sweeney murder

CTV News has learned the jury in the Robert Steven Wright has found him guilty of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of Renee Sweeney in Sudbury on Jan. 27, 1998.

northernontario.ctvnews.ca

 

[Cedars]

The judge has sent the jury back to prepare their sentencing recommendation. It's life with no possibility of parole for 10 to 25 years for second-degree murder. If allowed the lesser, he could be released in about 3.5 years, due to double time for time served in custody prior to sentencing. The double time bonus is no longer in effect for crimes committed in present times.

The judge determines the sentence.

Robert Steven Wright found guilty in Renee Sweeney murder

CTV News has learned the jury in the Robert Steven Wright has found him guilty of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of Renee Sweeney in Sudbury on Jan. 27, 1998.

northernontario.ctvnews.ca

Interesting issue of sentencing him so long after the crime.

If he'd been caught at age 18, would he have potentially gotten the same period of parole inegibility, a shorter, or a longer, than he'll get now?

One thing about this crime
is that he brought the knife. So although he wasn't charged with 1st degree murder, it has that flavour. I think that would probably make the parole ineligibility longer than the standard 10 years.

Then, the lack of admission of guilt in spite of the overwhelming evidence against, and therefore of remorse, even after all this time and the chance to reflect and become more mature, seems to me that should almost count to lengthen parole ineligility (not sure whether that's legal principal, though).

Certainly, he won't be released on parole until he changes his tune, admits he was 100% guilty, is very remorseful, etc. It not an automatic 3.5 years and he's back to his old life.

JMO

 

[Cedars]

Shortly after 4:30 p.m., the jury returned to the courtroom to deliver its recommendations of Wright serve 20 to 25 years in custody before he is eligible for parole, less time served in pre-trial custody.

Gordon released the jury and reminded members it is against the law to talk about anything that was discussed during deliberations with anyone unless called to testify in court.

Defence attorney Michael Lacy told CTV News Wright will appeal the conviction.

Robert Steven Wright found guilty in Renee Sweeney murder

CTV News has learned the jury in the Robert Steven Wright has found him guilty of second-degree murder in the stabbing death of Renee Sweeney in Sudbury on Jan. 27, 1998.

northernontario.ctvnews.ca

Wow, the jury are not cutting him any slack!

 

[Gina20]

Interesting issue of sentencing him so long after the crime.

If he'd been caught at age 18, would he have potentially gotten the same period of parole inegibility, a shorter, or a longer, than he'll get now?

One thing about this crime
is that he brought the knife. So although he wasn't charged with 1st degree murder, it has that flavour. I think that would probably make the parole ineligibility longer than the standard 10 years.

Then, the lack of admission of guilt in spite of the overwhelming evidence against, and therefore of remorse, even after all this time and the chance to reflect and become more mature, seems to me that should almost count to lengthen parole ineligility (not sure whether that's legal principal, though).

Certainly, he won't be released on parole until he changes his tune, admits he was 100% guilty, is very remorseful, etc. It not an automatic 3.5 years and he's back to his old life.

JMO

No, parole is never automatic. It depends on a number of things, as you state, including remorse, good behavior in custody and a hearing in front of the Parole Board. Parole can be revoked for bad behavior on the outside. Conditions apply for life.

Parole Board of Canada - Canada.ca

The Parole Board of Canada (PBC) is an independent administrative tribunal that, as part of the criminal justice system, makes quality conditional release and record suspension decisions, and clemency recommendations. The PBC contributes to the protection of society by facilitating, as...

www.canada.ca

Is there remorse? RSW will have an opportunity to speak to that when he is sentenced. He sought bail multiple times.

Is this crime deserving of parole on the low end of the 10- to 25-year eligibility period? We'll have to wait for sentencing. It was violent enough that the judge would not allow the jury to consider manslaughter. The jury has suggested 20 to 25 years. It's unlikely he will get a 10-year eligibility at this point. The 10-year minimum is not standard. Eligibility depends on the circumstances of the crime. Any issues relevant to the sentence and parole eligibility will be brought up during sentencing. Has a date been set?

Double time for time served does apply, though, so whatever the eligibility period is, double the time served will be deducted to make parole eligibility sooner. The rules changed in 2009. Crimes committed after that are subject to the new rules.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-law-ends-2-for-1-credit-on-jail-sentences-1.838432

This case was probably always going to appeal, one way or the other.

 

[musicaljoke]

Interesting issue of sentencing him so long after the crime.

If he'd been caught at age 18, would he have potentially gotten the same period of parole inegibility, a shorter, or a longer, than he'll get now?

One thing about this crime
is that he brought the knife. So although he wasn't charged with 1st degree murder, it has that flavour. I think that would probably make the parole ineligibility longer than the standard 10 years.

Then, the lack of admission of guilt in spite of the overwhelming evidence against, and therefore of remorse, even after all this time and the chance to reflect and become more mature, seems to me that should almost count to lengthen parole ineligility (not sure whether that's legal principal, though).

Certainly, he won't be released on parole until he changes his tune, admits he was 100% guilty, is very remorseful, etc. It not an automatic 3.5 years and he's back to his old life.

JMO

Do we know that he brought the knife? I certainly assume that he did, along with the bizarre gardening gloves, but I don't know if it was ever said that he brought it.

 

[musicaljoke]

So, what's everybody's sense of things?

Will there be a verdict?
When?
Verdict?

My guesses:
Yes
Late Thursday morning
Guilty

Good work, Junebug. I wasn't so sure that he would be found guilty, but I didn't want to put everyone into a funk by saying so. I'm glad to have been wrong.

 

[Gina20]

Do we know that he brought the knife? I certainly assume that he did, along with the bizarre gardening gloves, but I don't know if it was ever said that he brought it.

I wear similar knit cotton gardening gloves for use under leather work gloves on cool days. It's helpful for pruning trees and shrubs during Feb./March. I've wondered if leather gloves were involved, but none were mentioned.

 

[musicaljoke]

I wear similar knit cotton gardening gloves for use under leather work gloves on cool days. It's helpful for pruning trees and shrubs during Feb./March. I've wondered if leather gloves were involved, but none were mentioned.

Maybe leather gloves were left at school, along with a winter coat and boots.

 

[zerotohero]

Some more details from today here: 'Renée got justice': Family erupts with joy at guilty verdict

"Throughout the trial, Wright’s father would stand as his son was brought into the room, similar to the way the court is asked to stand for the judge and jury’s entrance. Today, as he was brought back into the court to hear the sentencing recommendation, more than 40 of his friends and family stood."

I get that they are hurting but this feels rather tasteless to me with Sweeney's family and supporters present.

"Of the jurors, two stated no less than 20 years, two stated 22 years, two said 23, and seven jurors felt no less than 25 years was appropriate."

Have to feel the recommendation of 23 years is a poignant one given Renee Sweeney's age.

 

[Gina20]

Some more details from today here: 'Renée got justice': Family erupts with joy at guilty verdict



I get that they are hurting but this feels rather tasteless to me with Sweeney's family and supporters present.



Have to feel the recommendation of 23 years is a poignant one given Renee Sweeney's age.

He took his father's jacket to commit a murder. Now we learn that his father acted this way throughout the trial.

 

[JuneBug67]

Good work, Junebug. I wasn't so sure that he would be found guilty, but I didn't want to put everyone into a funk by saying so. I'm glad to have been wrong.

Thanks musicalnote. My thoughts going into that were what several here have expressed at one point or another. How fundamentally unbelievable his story was, how incongruous with normal human instincts. The fingerprint evidence, his DNA in significant quantity associated with her fingernails. I was just suddenly struck with a clear sense that it was all going to be enough,

 

[JuneBug67]

The sentencing will be interesting. I suspect Wright will decline any substantive statement due to the intended appeal. The number the judge comes up with will be meaningful because he is very likely somebody who will be released someday. His age at the time of the crime, his clean record since, the fact that he was a productive member of society and the fact that he has significant love and support in his life all bode well for eventual reintegration.

My guess on the number of years is that the judge may come in with a slightly lower number than the jury did. Possibly 17 or 18 years. I can imagine jury members who felt Wright just straight up lied to their faces, who watched his lawyer drag an innocent alternate suspect through the mud over and over again, and who saw what must have been heartbreaking photos of Renee were not in a merciful mood. The judge on the other hand will be required to balance aggravating and mitigating factors. We will see on April 4!

 

[musicaljoke]

Some more details from today here: 'Renée got justice': Family erupts with joy at guilty verdict



I get that they are hurting but this feels rather tasteless to me with Sweeney's family and supporters present.



Have to feel the recommendation of 23 years is a poignant one given Renee Sweeney's age.

Yes, especially after they were warned about their behaviour before the verdict came down, that they were to respect each other. Shouting out in the courtroom is not cool. This is not a game of winners and losers, it's a judicial process.

 

[musicaljoke]

He took his father's jacket to commit a murder. Now we learn that his father acted this way throughout the trial.

The judge should have put a stop to that behaviour.

 

[Gina20]

Jury finds Robert Steven Wright guilty of Renee Sweeney's murder (updated)

On Jan. 27, 1998, Renee Sweeney, an employee working alone at the Adults Only Video store in the strip mall at 1500 Paris St. was brutally murdered, stabbed 27 time…

thesudburystar.com

Abrupt shouts followed by tears came from the corner of the courtroom Wednesday where sister Kim Sweeney, accompanied by close friends and family members, were seated late Wednesday afternoon as the jury delivered its verdict following about 14 hours of deliberation.

In sharp contrast, Wright, now 43, did not show any emotion. Neither did many of his family members and supporters seated behind him.

A sentencing hearing date for Wright will be set in Superior assignment court April 4.

 

[Gina20]

The judge should have put a stop to that behaviour.

I believe the accused enters the courtroom before the jury and judge, so I'm not sure he could do anything about it. I've never heard about this kind of behavior in a courtroom before.

 

[Gina20]

Yes, especially after they were warned about their behaviour before the verdict came down, that they were to respect each other. Shouting out in the courtroom is not cool. This is not a game of winners and losers, it's a judicial process.

I posted to show the contrast between two articles, one stating a burst of joy, cries of “yes” and “thank you” echoed from one side of the courtroom; the other describing it simply as abrupt shouts. It's easy to get two very different interpretations of what went on from two different news articles. One seems like a natural reaction of joy. The other seems hostile. The judge saw it in context. We didn't.

Like so much of the trial, it's difficult to interpret without being there in person.

 

[Gina20]

Robert Steven Wright will have spent about 1576 days in custody prior to sentencing. His parole eligibility will be 8.6 years shorter (about 3152 days) than whatever the judge decides on April 4, 2023.