What the jury didn't hear: Robert Major suing province over missing stop sign

Robert Major, the Saskatchewan man on trial for a highway crash that killed three of his loved ones, is suing the provincial government over a stop sign that was missing the day he collided with a semi. 

The civil suit, filed in 2017, is one of several things Major's jury didn't hear about during his Court of Queen's Bench trial over the last week and a half in Saskatoon. 

That jury, made up of seven men and five women, began deliberating over Major's fate Thursday.

Major, 35, is charged with:

• Three counts of dangerous driving causing death. 
• Three counts of dangerous driving causing bodily harm. 
• Three counts of criminal negligence causing death.
• Three counts of criminal negligence causing bodily harm.

Dangerous driving causing death comes with a maximum prison term of 14 years, while criminal negligence causing death could mean life imprisonment for Major. 

What happened

In the morning darkness of Feb. 22, 2016, Major was about eight kilometres west of Langham, Sask., driving his pickup truck north on gravel Grid Road 3083 toward Highway 16.

Major had six passengers: three sons and a nephew, Major's girlfriend Kimberly Oliverio and his employee Scott Eckel. None were wearing seatbelts.

After driving through the Highway 16 intersection at a recorded speed of 137 kilometres an hour — more than 50 kilometres over the speed limit — Major crashed into a semi hauling nine cars and weighing about 36,000 kilograms.

The collision propelled the semi more than 80 metres into a ditch. The battered front of Major's truck was embedded into the semi's first trailer.

Oliverio and two of the children, both sons of Major's, died. Major's nephew had both his legs broken and Eckel suffered brain damage. 

Pointing fingers

In his lawsuit against the province, Major claims the government was responsible for properly maintaining the stop sign at the intersection. 

"With no stop sign in place and no right of way clearly described," Major drove onto the highway, according to his statement of claim. 

During the trial, the jury heard that contractors working for SaskPower had done work in the area where the sign was knocked down and that the sign stayed down during the two weeks leading up to the crash. 

A SaskPower spokesperson told CBC that, "SaskPower is not aware of any of its contractors coming into contact with a stop sign at that location. We also have no record of work being performed by a contractor or our own crews at that location in the months leading up to the incident."

A Langham-area resident, Daved Meakin, testified that he told the Rural Municipality of Corman Park two weeks before the crash about the toppled sign. The RM told CBC News last week that, after hearing from Meakin, it had passed on the concern to the Ministry of Highways and Infrastructure, which is responsible for the sign. 

The sign was reinstalled one to two days after the collision, court heard.

"This is a case that would not be tried if people had responded and a stop sign was there," said one of Robert Major's lawyers, Brian Pfefferle, outside court last week.  

"Tragic consequences like this can be avoided if people take responsibility for their situations and jobs, and that's what [didn't happen] here, in our view."

Crews frequently inspect signs, a spokesperson for the ministry told CBC News last week. 

"If they notice one down or a report is made from the public, a sign crew will go out to the location as quickly as possible and replace it with a temporary sign," the spokesperson said.  

"Our crews must call into Sask First Call and wait to ensure there are no underground lines for the safety of workers before the permanent sign is installed."

The province argued in its statement of defence that Major's "own carelessness, recklessness or negligence" was the sole cause of the crash.

On Monday, during cross-examination by Crown prosecutor Michael Pilon, Major admitted that he was responsible for driving over the speed limit, not buckling in any of the children and not having a proper harness for four-year-old Brendan Major — the youngest person killed — who was seated on a front passenger's lap.  

But Major denied being on the phone during the drive, which clashed with earlier testimony from his nephew.

The province, in its statement of defence, said that as a resident of the Langham area, Major often used the intersection.

Major said in court he'd only been through that intersection about 10 times. 

Major is asking for a total of $180,000 in bereavement damages for him, his ex-wife and the parents of Kimberly Oliverio. He's also seeking money for past and future lost income and the cost of filing the lawsuit. 

'Golden example of how not to run a jury trial'

The trial got off to a rocky early start, with a good chunk of the third day taken up with a disagreement about the qualifications of the Crown's collision expert.  

"This is a golden example of how not to run a jury trial," Justice Mona Dovell sternly told the lawyers while the jury was excused.

"I don't like this going in and out, but trust me it was unavoidable," she later told the jury.

Failed attempt at mistrial 

The jury at Major's trial wasn't present for some of the more notable legal tussling between the Crown and defence lawyers.

Ainsley Furlonger, Pilon's Crown co-counsel, asked some of the witnesses she questioned if there was "anything else" they'd like to add at the end of their testimony.  

Mark Brayford, Pfefferle's partner on the defence team, said he "cringed" every time Furlonger said that. 

Dovell agreed that the prompt could lead a witness to say something that could "derail" the trial, and so asked the Crown not to use that phrase again.

Then on Monday, Brayford argued that the Crown had drawn out testimony from a witness that cast Major in a negative, prejudicial light. 

RCMP Cst. Aaron Rushton testified about returning Major's two phones to him the day after the crash, while Major was in hospital. The police had been phoned by Major's lawyer, who asked for the phones back, Rushton said. 

"Robert asked right away why we had the phones," said Rushton, adding that Major seemed upset. "It was my understanding that they were seized for safekeeping," Rushton said. 

Brayford also objected to Rushton's testimony that Major had smoked a medical marijuana joint the night before the crash.

But Justice Dovell pointed out that Brayford had had a previous chance to object to that testimony, and so allowed it to stay on the record.