Jury begins deliberations in seconddegree murder trial
A jury is now deciding the fate of a Toronto man accused of intentionally stabbing his friend to death during a confrontation that broke out in the second-floor bedroom of the Bethune Street man’s home on the afternoon of Aug. 30, 2012. Shaune Brown, 33, is being tried for second-degree murder in Peterborough Superior Court of Justice in connection with the death of Cory Fleetwood, 29, who was the morning baker at the Tim Hortons at Lansdowne St. and Ashburnham Dr.
The eightwoman, four-man panel began deliberations shortly after 4 p.m. Wednesday after hearing lawyers’ closing arguments in the morning and being instructed by trial judge Justice Bruce Glass, who began his charge early in the the afternoon.
The Crown’s position is that Brown unlawfully and intentionally killed Fleetwood and that the evidence heard in the trial, which got underway with jury selection on Jan. 9, proves his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defence’s position is that Brown didn’t mean to kill Fleetwood, that he did so out of self-defence and provocation – two defences that could see the defendant acquitted or the seconddegree murder charge reduced to manslaughter.
The jury can return one of three decisions.
They must find Brown guilty of second-degree murder if they find the Crown proved three elements beyond a reasonable doubt – that Brown caused Fleetwood’s death, that he caused the death unlawfully and that he had the state of mind required for murder.
Brown has admitted to causing Fleetwood’s death, testifying that he stabbed him once in the chest, so the first element will be excluded from the jury’s consideration.
Brown, who testified that he acted in self-defence when Fleetwood attacked him, could be acquitted if the jury believes that his actions were lawful, that his use of force was necessary to preserve himself from death or grievous bodily harm.
Brown could also be found guilty of the lesser charge of manslaughter if jurors believe his actions, which the trial heard resulted in 30 sharp-force injuries to Fleetwood’s body, were provoked and that the death was a part of a criminal act.
Wednesday’s proceedings began with defence lawyer Christopher Hicks’s approximately 40-minute closing address to the jury.
He reminded the jury that Brown repeatedly denied intending to kill his friend, who he had planned to stay with for a week. They were drinking and playing video games when the deadly altercation took place about 3 1/2 hours after Brown arrived.
The case is not a whodunnit, Hicks reminded. “It’s clear Shaune Brown caused the death of Cory Fleetwood. What remains to be determined is the culpability of Shaune Brown. Is Shaune Brown guilty of murder? Is Shaune Brown guilty of manslaughter? Or is he not guilty at all?”
Hicks noted how his client said during his testimony that he made a comment “out of idle curiosity” regardingthe“chaos”inFleetwood’s home before his host took offense, because the possessions in boxes belonged to his late father.
The conflict seemed like a “childish exchange” or a “sandbox squabble,” but the “highly disturbing” aspect to it was the large knife Fleetwood returned with from the kitchen. He scratched Brown’s own video gaming system, prompting Brown to smash Fleetwood’s Xbox hard drive.
The act of getting the knife was “out of proportion” to the comment, Hicks said, before recalling Brown’s evidence about how he went upstairs to gather his belongings to leave before being confronted by Fleetwood in the bedroom.
His host came in furious, yelling and got “in his face,” so Brown “understandably” pushed him away, causing him to stumble. The city man got up and swung at his visitor, who described the intense pain as the knife blade “sawed” into his hand.
As they wrestled for it, Brown was afraid to let go, because he felt that he would get stabbed if he did, the defence lawyer said, asserting that his client sought only to defend himself. “Mr. Brown reasonably feared for his life.”
Once he got possession of the knife, Brown, with his eyes still open, stabbed Fleetwood once in the chest before continuing to strike him, with his eyes closed, in order “to protect himself and preserve himself,” Hicks told jurors.
The defence lawyer reminded jurors of his client’s limited education, which he said was likely because of the abuse he suffered at the hands of his father and at various foster homes, as well as his learning disabilities.
From time to time, while he was testifying, Brown could be seen struggling with his inability to express himself, Hicks said.
For example, if he was better able to express himself, he would have said he struck Fleetwood “blindly,” instead of saying he had his eyes closed, he said.
Anticipating prosecutors would say the 30 injuries Fleetwood suffered is evidence of an intent to kill, Hicks said that number also speaks to the desperation Brown had to preserve his own life in the face of a “maniacal” attack.
Later, during assistant Crown attorney Kelly Eberhard’s closing address, she said Brown’s claim to have killed Fleetwood by accident is an “unbelievable statement,” given the evidence. “Thirty sharp-force wounds ... that is no accident.”
Speaking about self-defence, Hicks told jurors the law does not require someone being attacked to measure their response with mathematical precision, that it allows a wide degree of discretion to use whatever amount is necessary “even if it takes 20 or 30 blows.”
FleetwoodattackedBrown“relentlessly ... he frantically defended himself because he feared for his life. He did so until Cory Fleetwood ceased his attack,” he said.
Eberhard, who said there are no reasonable grounds to believe Brown had to kill to survive, had a different explanation when she later highlighted evidence regarding Fleetwood’s wounds, which included several “defensive type” injuries.
The 20 wounds on Fleetwood’s back and the back of his arms “doesn’t add up” to self-preservation, she pointed out. If his hands were up, that makes Brown the aggressor. “Was Cory Fleetwood coming at (Brown), running backwards? That doesn’t make sense.”
Hicks also spoke about provocation, calling it a “fair and reasonable conclusion” in this case.
Fleetwood’s act constitutes the wrongful act needed to deprive an ordinary person of self control, he said, pointing out that Brown lost control because of pain and fear. “There should be no doubt in your minds about this issue.”
The position of the Crown, Eberhard said, is that jurors should outright reject Brown’s testimony concerning the details about the altercation. He is neither credible or reliable, she said, calling his evidence at times, self-serving, evasive and inconsistent.
His story changed, the prosecutor said. For example, in chief examination, he said he wrestled with Fleetwood to get the knife away, but didn’t recall much after other then getting the knife, swinging it and striking his host once.
Then, during cross-examination, he said they also wrestled after Brown got the knife. “This is an inconsistency.” Also, Brown testified that he didn’t know how Fleetwood got the wounds on his chest and back and that his eyes were shut. But in cross, he said his eyes were open when he stabbed Fleetwood in the chest, but closed thereafter. “Again, this is a contradiction.”
Eberhard said Brown’s criminal record, which includes convictions of obstructing a peace officer and two count of disobeying a court order, displays a lack of credibility and trustworthiness.
His memory is also unreliable, the prosecutor said, noting how Brown could not remember how the altercation ended – that he just left the room.
In his about two-hour and 10-minute jury charge, Glass provided his instructions on the law, the duties of jurors, outlined the evidence in the case and the positions of both legal teams and explained the decision tree jurors will follow in rendering a verdict.
The trial judge reminded the panel that it’s up to them to determine the facts in the case, not him. “You, not I, decide what happened in this case ... you are the judges of the facts.”
It is their duty to talk to each other, to listen to what each other has to say and try to come to an agreement, after considering the evidence and applying the law as per his instructions. Their goal is to reach an agreement that matches the individual judgment of each juror, he said.
Brown, 33, pleaded not guilty to second-degree murder shortly after the trial got underway. It’s his second trial on the charge - the first ended in a mistrial in 2014, but the reasons cannot be reported under the terms of a publication ban.
The Crown closed its case Jan. 26 after calling 21 witnesses over eight days. Brown was then the lone witness called by the defense.
NOTE: There were more than a half dozen people seated in the gallery of court Wednesday, including several members of Cory Fleetwood’s family ... the courtroom was locked, as per protocol, during the closing addresses and judge’s charge.