Defence says evidence doesn’t prove accused killed Mountain barber
The lawyers for two men accused of murdering Mountain barber Neil Harris each argue the evidence does not prove their client was involved.
The jury trial for Odain Gardner, 25, and Erick Reid, 27 heard closing arguments from the men’s lawyers on Monday.
Lawyer Jaime Stephenson, for Gardner, argued evidence in the four-week trial doesn’t even prove her client was at the barbershop on Feb. 18, 2016, the day Harris was gunned down.
She said three of the witnesses — two who were in the shop — are lying, manipulative and “lack any moral compass.” One was an original suspect, and another gave four different versions of what happened, she said.
Stephenson argued the Crown’s theory that the two men went to the shop with handguns and “murderous intent” is unsupported by the direct evidence other than by those lying witnesses.
“There is not a shred of evidence he (Gardner) shot Mr. Harris.”
Why, she reasoned, would anyone kill someone over a small amount of marijuana. (Court has heard Harris sold small amounts to close customers, and Reid testified he went to the shop that day to buy two ounces worth.)
Stephenson said only cellphone evidence pertains to Gardner but it is unreliable, since it only shows a phone is within range of a tower, and Gardner had a girlfriend in the Upper Wellington barbershop area at the time. And the records don’t show who is making a call, she added.
She said although Reid, in his testimony, refused to name the shooter, it doesn’t mean he is protecting Gardner because the two spoke after the shooting.
“He may be afraid to name who the shooter is, but he is not afraid of Odain Gardner,” said Stephenson.
Lawyer Monte McGregor suggested jury members ask themselves if his client Erick Reid is “the worst robber ever, or someone caught completely by surprise” and then pointed to testimony that Reid was standing on a doormat inside the shop when the shooting started.
“He has no gun. He has no mask ... there is no gunshot residue on his hoodie. That’s because he’s not the shooter,” McGregor maintained. “Erick was there in the barbershop. But that doesn’t mean he knew what was going to happen ... This is a horrendous, spontaneous event.”
McGregor pointed out Reid “risked his life” to testify about his innocence and be perceived of breaking a “code” that could get him killed for talking.
Reid testified earlier he could not name the shooter because he feared for his safety and that of his family.
“The code exists and you’ve seen it in people (who testified) who have a criminal lifestyle,” he said, adding that it makes it impossible to identify anyone.
But he asked the jury, “does it make any sense that he (Reid) would go into a shop at 4:20 in the afternoon, not wear a mask, and not have a gun to rob someone?”
McGregor pointed to video evidence and says it shows Reid doesn’t have a weapon in his hands when running from the shop after the shooting.
McGregor spoke of “a lot of confusion about this case.” One theory is that it is robbery, and yet a witness says it didn’t feel like a robbery, it happened so fast, he said, adding there are suggestions it might have had a gang connection. Either way, all the evidence shows Reid didn’t do anything, he said.
“What supports the notion that this is a robbery gone wrong? ... Harris is a barber, not a big-scale drug dealer. Why engage in this?”
The Crown prosecutor will present closing arguments on Tuesday.