Â鶹´«Ã½AV

Skip to content

'I mean, seriously, how often do you really look at a man’s shoes?': Judge

'It appears the answer is more often than the script writers envisioned, as this case, which focuses on the issue of identity, demonstrates,': Justice Brenda Hildebrandt.
courtkbsaskatoon
Saskatoon Court of King's Bench heard It was those unique beige shoes with two white stripes that the Saskatoon Police Service officer zeroed in on when searching for a theft suspect while on his bike patrol.

SASKATOON – “‘I mean, seriously, how often do you really look at a man’s shoes?’” Justice Brenda Hildebrandt said, quoting the narrator of the 1994 movie, The Shawshank Redemption.

“It appears the answer is more often than the script writers envisioned, as this case, which focuses on the issue of identity, demonstrates,” said Justice Hildebrandt on Aug. 17 when she found 40-year-old Gary Alexander Iron guilty of robbery from a Saskatoon men’s clothing store.

During the trial, photos and videos, as well as a pair of shoes and a puffer vest, were entered into evidence by Crown Prosecutor John P. Knox.

It was those unique beige shoes with two white stripes that the Saskatoon Police Service officer zeroed in on when searching for the suspect while on his bike patrol May 9, 2022, court heard. 

The SPS police officer testified that he found the shoes “to be very distinctive,” and noted – from his observations working in Saskatoon’s downtown area for many years – that jackets and pants can easily be changed but people don’t often change their shoes, particularly if they have found a pair that fits well.

“Thus, armed with the images of the shoes, (the officer) worked his subsequent bike patrol shift ‘out looking for those shoes,’” said Justice Hildenbrandt in her written decision.

The officer “believed finding the shoes was ‘the best chance’ he had at locating the individual responsible for the robbery,” said Justice Hildebrandt.

Sure enough, later that day when the SPS officer went by the Saskatoon Tribal Council (STC) building, which helped people who don’t have a place to stay, he saw a man wearing those distinctive shoes. The man, however, hadn’t even changed his jacket and pants and was still wearing the $295 ECOALF brand puffer vest and $185 geometric print shirt he had stolen from the men’s clothing store.

The SPS officer approached the man, and it turned out that he recognized the suspect because he had a previous dealing with him in September 2014 and in the ensuing years while on patrol downtown, the officer would encounter the man on occasion and the two would acknowledge each other.

The SPS officer couldn’t remember his name, but when he approached the suspect in front of the STC building on the day of the robbery, and asked his name, he identified himself as Gary Iron.

During the trial in Saskatoon Court of King’s Bench in May, three customers of the men’s clothing store who witnessed the robbery, also identified Iron as the suspect.

Court heard that Iron had changed into the clothes in the changing room and tried exiting the store with the new clothes, leaving his old clothes in the changing room. When the owner of the store stopped him and said he had to either pay for the clothes or go back into the changing room and remove them, Iron tried telling the owner that a non-existent “old lady” had already taken his payment for the clothing.

The owner told Iron there was no “old lady” who worked at the store.

With that, “The thief then lowered his sunglasses and looked at (the store owner), who repeated the direction regarding returning to the dressing room if he was not going to pay for the goods,” said Justice Hildebrandt. “Following a ‘shuffle step’ toward the dressing room, the thief turned around quickly and hit (the store owner) twice before exiting the front door.”

Defence counsel argued that the element of identity was the key issue in the case against Iron and a recognition voir dire was held during Iron’s trial in May. The voir dire partly dealt with past dealings a police officer had with Iron. Justice Hildebrandt ruled that the police officer’s testimony about how he knew Iron was admissible.

Justice Hildebrandt watched the evidence videos, viewed the photos, and heard three witnesses’ and the officer's testimony. She ruled that the Crown had proven the element of identity beyond a reasonable doubt.

“I have therefore independently concluded that Mr. Iron is the individual shown in the photos and videos,” said Justice Hildebrandt.

[email protected]

#CrimeCopsCourt_SKTODAY

Don't count on social media to deliver your local news to you. Keep local news a touch away by bookmarking SASKTODAY.ca's homepage at this link.

 to bookmark our Crime, Cops and Court section.

Here's why you should bookmark your favourites.

push icon
Be the first to read breaking stories. Enable push notifications on your device. Disable anytime.
No thanks