Upon further research I can appreciate the complexity of the laws regarding profiting from criminal notoriety. For example, see this 2016 article “
Robert Pickton can't be prevented from profiting from memoir”.
(Quote: “There is nothing to prevent Canada's most prolific serial killer from making money as an author even as he sits in prison for the slayings of six women.”)
I think the combination of the 1) public’s desire to know more, 2) the father’s desire to express/process his thoughts, and 3) the media’s desire to get the scoop/get clicks makes for a perfect storm. I think that public outrage over what seems unethical (see the Pickton story) motivates laws which differ across Canadian provinces as well as globally. So the laws (which may be very hard to enforce) lag behind the public’s ethical views. Public views on the ethics of sharing and possibly profiting from criminal notoriety differ tremendously (eg from not limiting free speech to protecting victims families).
My hope is that eventually a responsible journalist will publish material that includes the RCMP final report to help make sense of the entire matter. And that in the meantime the father’s public attempts to process the event do not add to unduly to the grief/anger of the victims family. I also wish that the media would show restraint and not engage in what I see as an exploitation of the father’s confusion and grief - but given the motivations I know some will not refrain.