Trial begins for man accused in Edmonton club shooting

EDMONTON The defence lawyer in a murder trial over a Whyte Avenue area nightclub shooting wants to prevent prosecutors from asking witnesses questions that may lead to the identification of his client.

What is expected to be a lengthy first-degree murder trial began Monday of Arman Dhillon, who is charged in the shooting death of Amin Mohammed Abdullahi.

Abdullahi, 30, was fatally shot outside of the Tribute Lounge at 8111 105 St. around 2:40 a.m. on March 20, 2016. After the shooting, police publicly announced that a Canada-wide warrant had been issued for Dhillon and distributed a photograph and description of him.

Several days later, police announced Dhillon had turned himself in.

Dhillon is also charged with aggravated assault and using a firearm in commission of an offence in connection to serious but nonlife-threatening injuries suffered by Abdullahi’s brother. At the time, family said the brother had also been shot.

Dressed in a dark suit, Dhillon sat in the prisoner’s box Monday. During an adjournment, he spoke with supporters. Dhillon is not in custody, but was wearing an ankle monitoring bracelet.

Crown prosecutors Anders Quist and Bertrand Malo began their case by calling Tribute Lounge staff as witnesses, but questioning was put on hold when defence lawyer Brian Beresh made an application to prevent any witnesses from either identifying his client sitting in the prisoner dock, or through photos or videos entered as evidence.

“We object to the witnesses being shown any image that they haven’t identified because it’s too prejudicial,” he argued.

Beresh said police made a “very weak effort” to get a description of the suspect from witnesses during the investigation, and to show them exhibits and then ask if they can identify the suspect while his client is very clearly visible in the prisoner box is problematic.

He also noted the widespread publication of his client’s identity and image shortly after the shooting.

In response, Crown prosecutor Anders Quist called Beresh’s application “premature” and “unbalanced.”

He said there’s no precedent for barring evidence from being admitted with no consideration at all.

At most, Quist said, a voir dire — or a trial within a trial — could be held to determine if the evidence should be excluded or not.

Court of Queen’s Bench Justice June Ross told the lawyers she’ll have a decision for them Tuesday.

The case is scheduled to run for four weeks.