Evidence complete in trial of former Hamilton paramedics

Both prosecution and defence teams request additional time to prepare closing submissions

All of the evidence is submitted in the criminal case against two former Hamilton paramedics charged with failing to provide the necessaries of life to a young man dying from a gunshot wound.

The precedent-setting trial began in November before Justice Harrison Arrell before moving online amid Ontario’s stay-at-home order.

On the night of Dec. 2, 2017, Christopher Marchant and Steven Snively were called to Sanford and Main streets where they came upon 19-year-old Yosif Al-Hasnawi lying on the road. Dispatch, police, fire and witnesses at the scene said they believed he had been shot with a pellet gun.

In fact, a single .22 calibre hollow point bullet had been fired through his abdomen, perforating two major blood vessels. He was bleeding internally and would be dead an hour after being shot.

The gunman, Dale King, was acquitted of second-degree murder. The Crown is appealing that verdict.

Throughout the paramedic trial, court heard from witnesses there that night, including some who said there was laughter and that a dying AlHasnawi was accused of acting. In the back of the ambulance, the paramedics spent 17 minutes assessing Al-Hasnawi, who had a high heart rate and was flailing around.

They decided to take him to St. Joseph’s Hospital, which has a psychiatric emergency room, and not the regional trauma centre.

Marchant testified that nobody on scene believed the wound was serious. Snively testified to being shocked at learning that Al-Hasnawi had been pronounced dead.

The final day of the paramedic trial concluded with the crossexamination of the defence’s final witness, Dr. Patrick Croskerry, a professor at Dalhousie University who has studied the impact of biases in medicine.

He examined the case and found eight “cognitive biases” influenced the paramedics that night. This began with an “anchoring bias” — in plain language, tunnel vision — that led paramedics to believe they were dealing with a pellet gun wound. From there was a cascade of biases, including “confirmation bias” where people look for evidence that backs up what they already believe. These biases are subconscious.

On cross-examination, assistant Crown attorney Linda Shin pressed Croskerry, including with questions about medical professional training and protocols meant to overcome these problems.

Both the prosecution and defence asked for time to prepare the closing submissions, given the complexity of the case. The trial resumes March 10.