Stay informed with the LNN Daily Newsletter

Closing arguments delivered in attempted murder trial

Feb 20, 2018 | 2:28 PM

LETHBRIDGE – A verdict is all that remains in the case of a young man who is accused of attempted murder and aggravated sexual assault, as his trial wrapped up with closing arguments Tuesday, Feb. 20.

The accused, who is now 20-years-old, cannot be identified as he was 17 at the time of the alleged offence.

In statements made to police on May 3, 2015, a 45-year-old woman said she had been staying at her step-father’s apartment along the 2100 block of Palm Road South, when she was attacked by an unknown man.

She told officers that the man sexually assaulted her, then dragged her outside where he continued the sexual assault, before cutting her throat and fleeing the scene. With help from her step-father, she was able to get a towel around her neck and they found someone to call 911.

When interviewed by police, her step-father said that he witnessed the attack inside his apartment, going on to provide a name (the first name was incorrect, but the last name matched), description, and residence for the individual who he said was responsible.

Both the woman and her step-father died of unrelated causes before the matter went to trial.

Defence Arguments

“I have lingering issues with formulating my argument, your honour,” stated defence lawyer Scott Hadford at the outset of his arguments, adding that he was “At a loss at times,” while developing the defence position. Hadford explained that he had significant concerns regarding hearsay evidence that was allowed into the trial from the alleged victim and her step-father.

The judge ruled in November that statements made to police by the 45-year-old victim and her step-father were admissible, following a hearing to examine the issue.

While outlining his concerns, Hadford explained that neither individual made their statements under oath, adding that he had no opportunity to cross examine them to help determine the validity of what they had to say. He also noted that the victim was four times over the legal driving limit when her blood/alcohol level was tested at the hospital, and that her step-father had also been drinking.

“Ultimate reliability of those statements cannot be met,” he told the court.

“We are essentially, in this case, in the hands of the Lethbridge Police Service,” Hadford continued, before saying that he didn’t want to disparage LPS, but wanted to make the point that evidence should come directly from the source.

Moving on to the fact that the victim’s DNA was found on a tank-top shirt that the accused was arrested in, Hadford referred to his client’s testimony to the court. The man said he had been attacked a few days earlier by two men and two women while walking downtown, saying one of those women could have been the victim, and that’s potentially when her DNA could have gotten onto his shirt.

“In this case it would be inappropriate to convict [my client] on that evidence,” Hadford concluded.

Crown Arguments

Crown prosecutor Lisa Weich, opened by saying the very question around the victim and witness statements had already been decided by the judge, and that it should no longer be open for debate. That said, she outlined the notes made by officers while taking the statements, pointing out the numerous times that they acknowledged the two individuals understood the questions asked of them and responded clearly and concisely, with no indication that they were too intoxicated to provide a statement.

She also discussed the level of detail in which the witness described the accused and the fact that he knew who he was and could direct them to the man’s home – located three blocks away. Weich explained that the witness had been friends with the father of the accused, and that both men had been in his apartment before.

While on the stand, the accused denied that he knew the witness.

Addressing the street fight, in which Hadford said the victim’s DNA could have gotten onto the shirt, Weich said the story of the accused sounded like a “slapstick Kung Fu movie.” She questioned how he could have fought off four individuals without sustaining any real injuries, short of a few scratches, and how he had time to remove his shirt and a backpack after being initially struck, then retrieving those items before running away.

“His story is simply unreasonable,” she stated.

After hearing from both sides, Judge Greg Maxwell adjourned the case to Feb. 28, at which time a date will be scheduled for his decision.