By Tina Comeau
THE VANGUARD
NovaNewsNow.com
About two-thirds of the way from the finish line of the Boston Marathon, there’s a section called Heartbreak Hill. That, a lawyer told a Yarmouth jury on Monday, is where 38-year-old Clayton Otis Jacquard finds himself.
He’s been walking his marathon since the age of 20. He’s not at the finish line yet, said Robert Gregan, for that Jacquard needed the jury’s help.
On Monday, June 7, Jacquard got that help when a jury unanimously decided that he should be allowed to go to the National Parole Board and ask it to consider granting him early parole.
By at least a two-thirds majority (although the true figure is not known as jury deliberations are secret) the jury also decided Jacquard should be immediately allowed to make his application for early parole.
Prior to the jury’s verdict Jacquard, who has served just over 17 years and five months of a life sentence, was not eligible to ask for parole until he reached the 25-year mark of his sentence.
In 1994, Jacquard was convicted of first-degree murder in the December 1992 shooting death of his former stepfather Alexander (Sandy) Hurlburt and the attempted murder of Barbara Wilkinson, who was living common law with Hurlburt.
When Jacquard had reached the 15-year-mark of his life sentence on the conviction of first-degree murder, he was allowed to apply to the court for a judicial review of his parole eligibility – a proceeding also known as a faint hope hearing. His hearing was only the second faint hope hearing to be held in Nova Scotia. It was also the first time a jury has been selected locally for a court matter since the new Yarmouth courthouse opened in 2008.
After three days of testimony, two hours of closing arguments from the lawyers, a charge to the jury that took the judge over an hour to read, and just over two hours of jury deliberation, it took less than two minutes for the jury to deliver it’s verdict.
On one side of the courtroom members of Jacquard’s family burst into tears of relief and joy.
On the other side of the courtroom Wilkinson and her family and friends – along with family and friends of Hurlburt – sat quietly as they absorbed the decision of the jury.
Ultimately, it will be up to the parole board to decide if Jacquard is granted early parole. And even if it does, it will be a slow and gradual process.
Jacquard’s lawyer explained that process outside of the courtroom following the jury’s verdict.
“Up until this stage . . . the farthest he could go was escorted temporary absences,” said Gregan. “Because he wasn’t made eligible for parole, he wasn’t able to go to that next step to go for unescorted temporary absences, to work release, to day parole and then onto eventually full parole and so he will have an opportunity to now go before the National Parole Board and ask for his privileges to be increased from escorted temporary absences up to working his way to full parole, so that door has now been opened for him.”
How soon could that process unfold? Gregan said he’s now eligible to apply right away, but how quickly the parole board would consider that application he didn’t know.
“He’s on his last batch of escorted temporary absences, which expire within the next few months, so his parole officer will have to put his case management plan together and see what they propose.”
Gregan said his client was obviously very happy about the jury’s decision and is looking forward to the future.
“Now that the jury has cleared the way for him to do that, he’s looking very much forward to moving ahead,” Gregan said.
Still, aside from a gradual process it is also a slow process should the parole board choose to grant Jacquard full parole.
“The reality is he’s still looking at several months or years until he gets full parole, and as the judge pointed out, he will be supervised for the rest of his life,” Gregan said.
Outside the court Jacquard’s mother, Judy Doucette, said the family was very relieved with the jury’s verdict. She said in the years since her son’s conviction there have been people who have done far worse and been sentenced to less time in prison. She also said her son had suffered greatly from the abuse he endured over the years prior to the shootings and his story was to be believed, despite what the Crown said in this hearing.
Prior to commencing their deliberations, Justice Kevin Coady had spent an hour and 15 minutes reading his charge to the jury. He reviewed much of the evidence given and exhibits filed during the three days of testimony at the hearing and reminded the jury that it was on this – the evidence, the law and common sense – that jury members had to base their verdict.
He cautioned them that they must discard all else from their minds. Emotions, sympathy and prejudices could not play a role in their decision.
Nor was the hearing a retrial of the crime.
“This hearing does not determine if the applicant is guilty, another jury has already decided that,” said Justice Coady.
