"This is a 16-year-old boy sitting on a porch who gets information about this rock that's exactly the same as a pathologist will say. "That's exactly what said the told him," said McDermott. McDermott cited the statement of fact from the pathologist, which was entered as evidence, which said the boy died from blunt force trauma with an object, possibly a rock. He told the court only the perpetrator would have known those details.
McDermott told the court it would be impossible for the witness to know certain details without having had that conversation around the time of the boy's disappearance in 2017. The identity of that witness was also covered by a publication ban because of his young age at the time of the incident.
He said the accused's DNA was found on the victim's pants.īut much of his closing arguments focused on the testimony of a witness who said he had a conversation with the accused, where the accused told him that he killed the young boy. McDermott said this is a case built on direct, and not circumstantial, evidence. "That is the only conclusion the court can draw." "There could be no doubt whatsoever that whoever hit him 12 times in the head with a rock and stabbed him six times in the torso … intended to kill him," he told Judge Susan Cooper. The identity of the accused and that of the victim are protected by a publication ban.Ĭrown prosecutor Paul McDermott told the Nunavut Court of Justice there is no question that the death of the 12-year-old was second-degree murder. He's one of two people who were charged with murder following a 15-month police investigation.
The accused is facing a charge of second-degree murder in connection with the 2017 death of a 12-year-old boy. Closing arguments have wrapped up in the case of a 21-year-old man accused of killing a young boy in Rankin Inlet, Nunavut, with both the prosecution and the defence looking to build their cases on whether testimony from a key witness can be considered dependable.
0 kommentar(er)
