With the evidence now complete and closing submissions delivered, the inquest into the death of Heather Winterstein has entered its most consequential phase.
Dr. Eden has formally charged the jury.
This charge is not a summary of the case, nor a reflection on what should be decided. It is a structured set of legal instructions that defines what the jury must do, what they must not do, and how they must arrive at their conclusions. It draws from the Coroners Act, from established legal principles, and from guidance shaped by past inquests and higher courts. It is designed to ensure that whatever the jury decides is lawful, defensible, and grounded in evidence.
At this stage, the role of the jury becomes both precise and profound. They are now the triers of fact. They are being asked to listen again to everything they have heard, to weigh it carefully, and to arrive at conclusions that will define how Heather’s death is understood and what may come next.
Every coroner’s inquest in Ontario requires the jury to answer five mandatory questions, and these questions form the official verdict. They must determine who the deceased was, where the death occurred, when the death occurred, what was the cause of death, and what was the manner of death.
In this case, there is no dispute about the first three. Heather Ashley Winterstein died on December 10, 2021, at Niagara Health in St. Catharines. Those facts are established. What remains are the final two questions, the ones that carry the greatest weight: what caused her death and by what means she died.
The jury has been instructed that cause of death is a medical determination. It is not a single moment but a sequence. The law requires that it be described as a chain of events, listed in reverse order, beginning with the immediate cause and working back to the underlying condition that set everything in motion.
In Heather’s case, the medical evidence established that she died from septic shock, the most severe form of sepsis, where infection overwhelms the body’s ability to respond. The jury may determine the cause of death as septic shock, or septic shock due to sepsis. They may also, if supported by their interpretation of the evidence, include contributing factors such as delayed treatment, but they must do so carefully and without assigning blame or legal responsibility.
They are not being asked to decide whether care was negligent. They are being asked to decide what happened medically, based on the evidence they believe.
Once the jury determines the cause of death, they must then decide the manner of death. This is not a free-form judgment. It is a structured decision guided by a formal framework used across Ontario. The jury must choose one of four classifications: natural, accident, homicide, or undetermined. Suicide has been explicitly removed from consideration, as there is no evidence to support it.
The process they must follow is sequential. They begin by asking whether the death was natural, meaning caused solely by disease or its complications without any contributing injury. If the answer is yes, their task is complete. If not, they move to the next question, which is whether the death was accidental, meaning it resulted from an injury where death was not intended, foreseen, or expected. If the death was not accidental, they must then consider whether it was inflicted. If it was inflicted, they must determine whether that injury was caused by the deceased or by another person. If caused by another person, the classification becomes homicide.
At every step, the jury must apply the same standard: the balance of probabilities. They are not required to be certain. They are required to determine what is more likely than not, based on careful scrutiny of the evidence.
Dr. Eden was clear about what the jury is not being asked to do. They are not deciding guilt. They are not determining negligence. They are not assigning legal responsibility. They are not judging individuals. They are judging evidence.
Even where the evidence includes actions, omissions, or decisions made by individuals, those are to be considered only insofar as they help explain what happened, not to determine fault. This distinction is essential because it shapes not only how the jury answers the questions before them, but how those answers are understood.
One of the most important clarifications provided in the charge relates to the meaning of homicide. In an inquest, homicide is not a criminal finding. It does not mean that someone is guilty of a crime. It is a classification that may be used if the jury finds that death resulted from an injury that was non-accidentally inflicted by another person.
This is a high threshold. The jury must consider whether death was intended, foreseen, or expected as a result of an act or omission. It is not enough to conclude that care could have been better. It is not enough to conclude that a death may have been preventable. Those are serious concerns and they are the reason the inquest is taking place, but they are not, on their own, the test for homicide.
The jury has also been reminded that undetermined is not a failure. It is a legitimate outcome. If the evidence does not clearly support one classification over another, or if it does not fit within the definitions provided, the jury may choose undetermined. This reflects the reality that not all deaths can be neatly categorized, even after careful review.
Beyond the five questions, the jury has another responsibility. They may make recommendations. These recommendations are not required, but they are central to the purpose of an inquest. They are forward-looking, intended to prevent future deaths, and must be grounded in the evidence heard during the proceedings. They must also be clear. Dr. Eden encouraged the jury to focus not just on what should change, but on what outcome they wish to see, leaving the specific implementation to those with the authority and expertise to carry it out.
At the close of his charge, Dr. Eden returned to the purpose of the inquest itself. He reminded the jury that the coroner’s system exists to speak for the dead in order to protect the living.
He acknowledged that the one person who could offer the clearest account of what happened cannot be heard. And so the responsibility now rests with the jury to review the evidence, weigh it carefully, answer the questions honestly, and ensure that what is learned here is not lost.
In the end, they are being asked to do something both simple and profound.
They are being asked to speak for Heather Winterstein.
Presented by Samantha Doxtater
Presented by GRANDMA RENEE
In a world seeking direction, Indigenous teachings offer clear and enduring policies for how to live in harmony with one another and the Earth. This workshop invites participants to explore the profound lessons of the Two Row Wampum Belt and other wampum belts as frameworks for mutual respect, environmental care, and collective well-being. These belts, created long before colonization, embody ancestral agreements that guide humanity on how to coexist with honor, dignity, and reciprocity.
Led by Grandmother Renee, this session emphasizes the importance of relearning and honoring the policies established by our ancestors, rather than creating new paths disconnected from this wisdom. Through the teachings of the belts, participants will uncover the principles of self-care, stewardship of the land, and respect for all beings. This is not about inventing something new—it is about rediscovering the instructions that were always there and committing to uphold them.
Key Takeaways:
Through this workshop, participants will be reminded that the wisdom of the belts is not only a guide for Indigenous communities but a path for all of humanity to walk together in respect and care for one another and the Earth.
Presented by Grandma Gail and Angela DeMontigny
Ceremony is more than tradition—it is a deliberate practice rooted in wisdom, responsibility, and foresight. This workshop explores the “science of ceremony” as a guide to living with intention and accountability for the next seven generations. Our ancestors used ceremony to prepare for the future, ensuring that their actions would benefit not only their own time but also those yet to come. Now, it is our responsibility to carry that practice forward.
Led by Grandmother Gail, this session will examine what has been lost and the actions we must take to restore, respect, and reclaim the ceremonial practices that ensure the well-being of future generations. Participants will be encouraged to reconnect with ceremony as a means of healing, reflection, and renewal, building a foundation of responsibility to guide us in restoring balance and harmony.
Key Takeaways:
Through this workshop, participants will rediscover the transformative power of ceremony as a pathway to healing, accountability, and preparation for a sustainable and harmonious future. Together, we will reaffirm our responsibility to the generations to come.
Presented by Asha Frost
Join Asha Frost, an Indigenous healer, teacher, and bestselling author, for a transformative workshop rooted in traditional teachings and the power of self-discovery. Asha’s work often centers on reconnecting with ancestral wisdom, embracing one’s authentic self, and creating pathways for healing and empowerment. Drawing from her Anishinaabe roots, she weaves stories, teachings, and practical tools to inspire participants to reclaim their power and align with their purpose.
Through her signature blend of traditional healing practices and modern insights, Asha guides participants in understanding how to honor their own journey, navigate challenges with resilience, and embrace the interconnectedness of all beings. This workshop is an invitation to explore the sacred within and around us, fostering personal growth and collective transformation.
Key Takeaways:
Whether you are seeking personal healing, professional inspiration, or a deeper connection to traditional wisdom, this session with Asha Frost promises to be a profound and enriching experience.
Presented by Allen Sutherland
The Seven Fires prophecy, as shared by seven prophets across different time periods, offers profound guidance for humanity’s path forward. According to Anishinaabe oral tradition, these teachings speak to the choices we face when the world has been polluted, and the waters turned bitter by disrespect. The prophecy teaches that humanity must choose between materialism and spirituality—one path leading to survival and the other to destruction.
In this workshop, Mishoomis Allen will guide participants through the teachings of the Seven Fires prophecy, exploring its relevance in today’s world and its call for spiritual renewal. Additionally, he will share his Canadian Indigenous Historical Timeline, providing a broader context for understanding the cultural, social, and spiritual significance of these teachings.
Key Takeaways:
This workshop offers an opportunity to reflect deeply on humanity’s collective responsibility and the transformative power of choosing a spiritual path for the survival of future generations.
Presented by Thohahoken Michael Doxtater
In this session, Thohahoken Michael Doxtater explores the ongoing impact of Canada’s colonial policies on Indigenous communities and the historical journey toward Truth and Reconciliation. He examines the systemic attempts to erase Indigenous identity, from residential schools to the suppression of cultural practices, and highlights Indigenous resilience and legal resistance. The presentation also delves into the concept of the “Canada Rafter,” a historical agreement acknowledging Canada’s adoption into the Indigenous Longhouse, raising the question: Has Canada truly upheld its responsibilities in this relationship?
