Claim of self-defence at heart of murder trial

Jury must consider whether man used justifiable force when he stabbed brother

A claim of self-defence will be a key issue for jurors to consider when they begin deliberations in a Regina murder trial.

Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Richard Elson plans to deliver his final instructions on Thursday. After that, a verdict on the seconddegree murder charge against Stevin Blaine Pascal (court documents previously referred to him as Steven) will be up to 12 jurors.

In closing arguments on Wednesday, Crown prosecutor Mitch Miller contended that Pascal stabbed his 22-year-old brother Trent Mark Gordon during what was “essentially a fist fight.” He suggested Pascal can’t claim selfdefence because he used unnecessary and disproportionate force in response to any threat posed by Gordon on May 25, 2015.

Gordon died from a single stab wound that pierced his heart and left lung.

Miller suggested Pascal’s version of events — with him making a backhanded swing with a paring knife while trying to get away from his machete-wielding brother — makes no sense.

“It’s makes no sense because it didn’t happen that way,” Miller argued.

He suggested the more accurate scenario was as described by a Crown witness, who said Gordon dropped the machete and was getting the better of Pascal in a fist fight when the accused pulled out a knife and swung it as they faced each other. Miller agreed the witness misidentified the exact knife — but he was right about the stabbing.

“When is a killing justified?” defence lawyer Kim Stinson asked the jury.

It’s for the Crown to prove that a claim of self-defence shouldn’t apply, he said, and Pascal responded reasonably to the threat posed by his brother, he said.

“He was fighting for his life,” said Stinson, adding that Pascal, smaller than his younger brother, feared Gordon was going to “chop him” with the machete.

Pascal, 38, testified that he’d managed to get up and away from his brother, who had swung a machete at him, and was running away from Gordon when he made a backhanded swing with a knife — initially unaware it had even connected.

Stinson, pulling the machete from its sheath and holding it up, urged the jury to consider what is reasonable under the circumstances in those split seconds.

“One, single backhand, desperate stab wound,” he said. “What would you do, faced with that terrible set of circumstances? Desperation. Fight or flight? You have to make a decision.”

Stinson likened the differences in the version of events given by witnesses to varied calls by referees at a Roughriders football game. He said the melee unfolded quickly, and witnesses could be confused about the chain of events.

But Miller argued it was Pascal’s memory that was faulty. According to testimony by Pascal’s thengirlfriend, when she saw him after the fight, he was quiet and scared and told her: “I don’t know how I could have stabbed him. I don’t remember.”

The fight spilled onto the street sometime before 2:50 a.m., which is when police responded to find Gordon dead. It began when Gordon and his partner returned to his Athol Street home and evicted Pascal and his girlfriend, who also lived there, as well as three guests.

All the witnesses said Gordon chased Pascal into the street.

“Stevin was not the aggressor ... he wasn’t trying to fight him,” said Stinson.

Miller argued those same witnesses said Gordon appeared shocked upon realizing he’d been stabbed.

“He did not expect to be stabbed in a fist fight with his brother,” he said.

But Stinson urged the jury to remember that, Gordon, who had meth and cocaine in his system, was seen that night alternatively with a knife, a golf club and a machete — and had on other occasions beat his brother with a table leg and a bottle.

“You have to decide if what (Pascal) did in the circumstances is justifiable,” he said.

What would you do, faced with that terrible set of circumstances? Desperation. Fight or flight? You have to make a decision.