Robert Latimer speaks with media near a playset at his family farm in Wilkie, Sask., on Mar. 15, 2008. He had been issued a four day unescorted absence by the National Parole Board to visit a sick friend or relative and returned to his farm in Wilkie. (Geoff Howe/Canadian Press)

Robert Latimer, a farmer working a spread in Saskatchewan northwest of Saskatoon, killed his 12-year-old daughter Tracy on October 24, 1993. There has never been any doubt about this.

Latimer told police he did it. He said he loved his daughter and could not bear to watch her suffer from a severe form of cerebral palsy. So he placed her in the cab of his Chevy pickup, ran a hose from the exhaust to the cab, climbed into the box of the truck, sat on a tire and watched her die.

An undated photo of Robert Latimer and his daughter Tracy at home. (Maclean's/Canadian Press)Tracy was a 40-pound quadriplegic, a 12-year-old who functioned at the level of a three-month-old. She had been repeatedly operated on and at the time of her murder was due for more surgery, this time to remove a thigh bone. She could not walk, talk or feed herself, though she responded to affection and occasionally smiled. Tracy was in constant, excruciating pain yet, for reasons not entirely clear, could not be treated with a painkiller stronger than Tylenol.

On November 4, 1993, Latimer was charged with first-degree murder. A year later, he was convicted of second-degree murder.

End of story?

No.

Momentous legal issues

The issues arising from the Latimer case are momentous. Should courts abide by the letter or the spirit of the law? Would a decision favourable to Latimer legalize euthanasia, mercy killing? Would it put the disabled in danger? Would it mean the end of mandatory minimum sentences for convicted persons?

The killing of Tracy Latimer has been called an act of "compassionate homicide." Others warn that leniency for Latimer, by means of a constitutional exception, would have shown that the disabled are regarded as second-class citizens.

Following his first conviction, the Latimer case became horrendously complex. The Supreme Court ordered a new trial when it was learned that the RCMP, acting on orders from the Crown, had possibly tainted the case by questioning potential jurors on their views on religion, abortion and mercy killing.

Latimer stood trial again in October 1997. A month later he was convicted, again, of second-degree murder.

The jury recommended he be eligible for parole after a year, even though the minimum sentence for second-degree murder is 25 years with no chance of parole for 10 years. (Automatic minimum sentences for first- and second-degree murder have been mandatory since 1976, as a trade-off for the abolition of capital punishment.)

'Compassionate homicide'

New legal ground was broken in December 1997, when Justice Ted Noble — trying to distinguish between mercy killing and cold-blooded murder — granted Latimer a constitutional exemption from the minimum sentence for second-degree murder. He explained that, for Latimer, the minimum sentence would constitute "cruel and unusual punishment."

Noble carefully detailed the reasons for his decision, anticipating the controversy it would provoke — and the likelihood it would be appealed. He said the law "recognizes that the moral culpability or the moral blameworthiness of murder can vary from one convicted offender to another." He called Tracy Latimer's murder a "rare act of homicide that was committed for caring and altruistic reasons. That is why for want of a better term this is called compassionate homicide."

Noble also described Latimer's relationship with Tracy as "that of a loving and protective parent" who wanted to end his daughter's suffering. Noble said Latimer "is not a threat to society, nor does he require any rehabilitation."

The Crown argued that Tracy was a relatively cheerful child, and her rights were violated by being killed by her father. According to the Crown brief presented at Latimer's second trial:

"Tracy enjoyed outings, one of which was to the circus, where she smiled when the horses went by. She also responded to visits by her family, smiling and looking happy to see them.

"There is no dispute that through her life, Tracy at times suffered considerable pain. As well, the quality of her life was limited by her severe disability. But the pain she suffered was not unremitting, and her life had value and quality."

Nearly a year later, in November 1998, the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal overturned Noble's ruling, imposing the mandatory minimum sentence: 25 years, with no parole before 10 years.

Then, on January 18, 2001, the Supreme Court of Canada upheld his conviction and life sentence.

His first bid for day parole in December 2007 was denied after a hearing at a Victoria prison. However, that decision was overturned two months later, and Latimer was ultimately released for day parole on March 13, 2008.

At the time of the 2001 Supreme Court ruling, critics worried that a decision soft on Latimer would send a signal to many convicted murderers that they, too, may be victims of "cruel and unusual punishment" and are eligible for constitutional exceptions to reduce their mandatory minimum sentences.

Unusual as the Latimer case is, there are related cases, such as battered women who have killed their batterers — often their husbands — and received leniency from the courts. Special legislation is being considered for victims who kill their oppressors, based on self-defence. It's more difficult when the victim, like Tracy Latimer, is so clearly blameless.