Closing arguments heard on sentence for accomplice
Closing arguments heard over sentence of youth who watched Leflar murder
Was a 19-year-old man acting out of impulsivity and immaturity when he took part in the stabbing death of 16-year-old Hannah Leflar, or does the fact he was “looking forward” to the murder of an unsuspecting friend show he is deserving of and requiring an adult sentence?
Queen’s Bench Justice Lian Schwann is left with that and other questions as she works on deciding whether to sentence the male — 16 at the time of the Jan. 12, 2015, incident to which he’s pleaded guilty to second-degree murder — as a youth or as an adult.
Defence lawyer Greg Wilson argued his client is not among those exceptional cases meeting the test for an adult sentence.
Referencing the 19-year-old’s surprising admissions on Wednesday, Wilson acknowledged his client was aware of longtime friend Skylar Prockner’s intentions when they drove to Leflar’s home after school that day.
And, according to the 19-yearold’s own testimony, he went into the house willingly with the intention of helping his friend commit murder.
But the defence lawyer argued those factors, and the terrible nature of the crime, still do not push this case into the realm of adult sentences.
“In minutes, he made a decision,” he said of his client’s decision to participate in the murder. “Is that a well-thought-out, mature, adult decision? Of course not .... That is a brash 16-year-old acting like a 16-year-old in the most heinous of situations.”
Wilson said the Youth Criminal Justice Act exists for a reason and contemplates sentencing for serious offences — even murder.
He filed case law in which he said youths who committed the actual physical killing received youth sentences, noting evidence shows his client by comparison was “someone standing in a room watching.”
Wilson noted the Crown bears the onus of proving a youth sentence is not sufficient to hold the youth accountable, and the defence lawyer argued such a sentence would be.
He said the judge could consider an intensive rehabilitative custody and supervision sentence, which uses federal funding to provide additional resources for offenders serving a youth sentence and can be considered as an alternative to an adult sentence.
While the male said he was prepared to do whatever was required of him, Crown prosecutor Chris White said that’s a problem since what’s required is unknown.
White said not only is there no real, believable motive to the male’s participation in the murder, but he noted the 19-year-old admitted to lying repeatedly — to his family, to his friends and acquaintances, to the court and to those who completed court-ordered assessments on him.
Because of that, White said very little is truly known about the male, making it difficult or even impossible to say he will be rehabilitated within the seven-year window (with a maximum four spent in custody) allowable under YCJA sentencing.
White noted the youth admitted on the stand to “looking forward to” helping Prockner kill Leflar which, the prosecutor added, might form the only real motive.
“There is only one logical answer…,” White said. “It’s he just wanted to do it. It’s that simple. It is as simple as it is frightening.”
White pointed out the male was a willing participant not only in the murder but also in troubling activities leading to it, such as discussed participation in a gang that contemplated murder as a potential activity, and a planned attack on Leflar’s then-boyfriend dubbed Project Zombify.
Given all that, and the lack of real answers, White argued it would be “reckless” to give the male anything other than an adult sentence that would monitor the 19-yearold for the rest of his life.
Schwann will render her decision on Nov. 7.