A York police officer who killed an 18-year-old pedestrian will be going to trial for a third time on the charge of dangerous driving causing death.

Det.-Const. Remo Romano was on duty and driving an undercover pickup truck as part of a surveillance team when he hit Natasha Carla Abogado as she crossed St. Clair Ave. E. at around 8 p.m. in February 2014. He was travelling at least 109 kilometres per hour in a 60-km zone, trying to catch up to and assist other members of his team, according to the court of appeal’s decision.

Romano, 45, was tried in May 2016, but a jury was unable to come to a unanimous verdict after days of deliberating, resulting in a mistrial.

He was tried again in September 2016 and a jury acquitted him of dangerous driving causing death. The Crown filed an appeal, taking issue with how the judge directed the jury to come to its verdict.

About a year later, Sept. 28, 2017, a panel of three court of appeal judges agreed with the Crown and ordered a new trial. They found the trial judge, Justice Brian O’Marra, wrongly explained the dangerous driving law to the jury. He incorrectly instructed the jurors to not only focus on how Romano’s actions as a driver caused Abogado’s death, but also how Abogado might have been at fault.

“Most significantly, the trial judge made irrelevant and adverse comments about Ms. Abogado’s conduct,” Justice David Paciocco said in his decision.

According to Paciocco, O’Marra told the jury to consider that Abogado was jaywalking and described it as an “inherently risky activity” and that “pedestrians must be aware, when they jaywalk, that drivers are not always paying attention, not always concentrating on what is going on ahead of them.” O’Marra also pointed out that Abogado’s clothing was dark and had “poor visibility” at the time of the collision.

These statements turned the jury’s attention away from the main issue of whether or not Romano’s driving was, in fact, dangerous.

After that, O’Marra did “properly reorient” the jury, but it was too late, Paciocco said.

“The errors in the charge … are sufficiently serious that the jury was not in a position to evaluate properly the dangerousness of the operation of the motor vehicle, leading to a miscarriage of justice.”

At the second trial, Crown prosecutor Philip Perlmutter said that Romano operated his vehicle at such a high rate of speed, it became impossible for him to adjust his driving if something unexpected happened. His speeding was also unnecessary, the Crown alleged, because the surveillance operation was focused on intelligence-gathering and was neither dangerous nor urgent.

Romano’s defence lawyer Bill MacKenzie said his client’s undercover work was unpredictable and he wanted to rejoin his team as quickly as possible. MacKenzie also highlighted the risk Abogado took by jaywalking, stepping into traffic on a four-way road at night.

Faced with a third trial, Romano is very disappointed, MacKenzie said in an email Friday.

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

“It is a rare occurrence that a court overturns a jury verdict that unanimously acquits,” MacKenzie said. “Not many people have to endure three jury trials for the same alleged offence.”

York Regional police confirmed Romano is an active officer on the force.