Don't let 'despicable' witness distract from case

Don't let 'despicable' witness distract from case
Supreme Court jury to find both men guilty of second-degree murder.
Belcourt and Mcgrath have pleaded guilty to break and enter and robbery with a firearm. The 10 jurors,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], who are to begin deliberating on their verdict today, must decide if Belcourt, who was the shooter,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], is guilty of murdering Hankel, and if Mcgrath, as a party to the act,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], is also guilty of murder.
Murray urged the jury not to be distracted by the "clearly questionable" character of the key Crown witness Michael Rennie, who received thousands of dollars from police for informing on Belcourt,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], his stepson at the time.
"What kind of man sells a gun to his son's friend, knowing they are going to commit a home invasion?" Murray said. "But the trial is about these two men, not Michael Rennie. He's merely a witness in this case."
Rennie may have minimized his role in planning the robbery, Murray said. But Belcourt and Mcgrath executed it and, during the robbery,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Hankel was killed.
The Crown's theory is that the two accused burst into Hankel's small Pembroke Street apartment while he was in the living room reading a magazine. Belcourt and Mcgrath were angry and assaulted Hankel,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], demanding a stash of marijuana, which Hankel did not have.
Belcourt, who had the gun, was mad,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Murray said, describing how the accused fired the gun into the ceiling of the bedroom. Belcourt then made a conscious decision to load more ammunition into the shotgun's chamber. He had the weapon pointed directly at Hankel's head.
"These are deliberate actions," Murray said.
Belcourt wasn't getting his way and he deliberately shot Hankel,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
The Crown believes Mcgrath, who did not testify, knew the gun was loaded and was in the bedroom when Hankel was shot. Hankel's DNA was found on Mcgrath's right running shoe,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], noted Murray. And after Belcourt and Mcgrath returned to Chantel Young's apartment, Mcgrath gave his clothes and shoes to Young to be washed and cleaned. His cleaned shoes were in the trunk of the car - along with other evidence they planned to destroy - when he and Belcourt were arrested.
"The only logical conclusion is he was in the room and got Mr. Hankel's blood on him,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]," Murray said.
Belcourt's defence lawyer, Tim Russell, told the jury his client was not an innocent man.
"Andrew Belcourt caused Mr. Hankel's death. That's true," Russell said. "He's guilty of manslaughter."
But the jury must ask did Belcourt intend to kill Han-kel or did he shoot him accidentally,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], Russell said.
He urged the jury not to accept the Crown's theory that Belcourt's mask fell down, spurring him to shoot Hankel. The three Crown witnesses - who testified Belcourt told them just that - are all highly problematic, Russell said.
"Mr. Rennie is probably one of the most despicable characters anyone has ever met," Russell said.
The other two - Young and Max Deleeuw - both lied to police and at the preliminary inquiry,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
"How do you know where the truth stops and the lies begin,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]?" asked Russell.
He also encouraged the jury to reject the Crown's argument that Belcourt knew his actions that night would likely cause death. Belcourt testified that he thought the safety was on. He testified he did not believe the gun was going to discharge,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych].
"None of you are Andrew Belcourt. None of you grew up with Mike Rennie . [Bel-court] had no gun or safety training. He did not appreciate the risk," Russell said.
Mcgrath's lawyer, Mike Munro, told jurors his client should be acquitted.
"I've never had a stronger feeling that my client and I are in someone else's trial," he said. "There are so many things Belcourt did that we are not party to,[link widoczny dla zalogowanych], and yet we get drawn in because we are part and parcel of the plan to commit the robbery, like it or not. And we don't like it."
相关的主题文章：

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

[link widoczny dla zalogowanych]

The post has been approved 0 times