‘Ordinary boy caught up in’ swarming death, lawyer says
A lawyer for one of the three youths convicted in the 2015 swarming death of a Burnaby teen in Whistler argued on Thursday against a bid by the Crown to have his client sentenced as an adult.
The youth in question, who can only be identified by the initials G.R. because he was 17 at the time of the fatal stabbing of Luka Gordic, 19, was convicted of manslaughter in October.
A second youth, identified as L.Z., was convicted of second-degree murder, and the third youth, A.D., was found guilty of manslaughter by B.C. Supreme Court Judge Terence Schultes.
On Wednesday, Crown counsel Julie Robinson began her submissions on the prosecution’s application to have all three young men sentenced as adults, which would result in stiffer sentences.
All three participated to varying degrees in the May 2015 group ambush of Gordic on a pedestrian walkway in Whistler Village. On Wednesday, Robinson addressed the particular circumstances surrounding L.Z. and A.D., and Thursday continued her submissions focusing on G.R.
Robinson argued that the legal test, which looks at whether the Crown successfully rebutted the presumption that a youth has a diminished moral capacity, was met for G.R.
“The level of (G.R.’s) moral blameworthiness for this crime is extremely high. He has participated in a group attack, which resulted in the death of a young man. Anything less than an adult sentence would be insufficient to hold (G.R.) accountable.”
The Crown argued the crime, which involved the group hunting for Gordic following a petty dispute between the victim and a fourth young man convicted in the slaying, had elements of planning and deliberation and was not spontaneous.
G.R. produced a knife and joined the group in the swarming attack. There was no evidence he used the knife, but after the assault, he discarded the weapon and fled the scene. He was later arrested with the victim’s blood on his shoe.
Brij Mohan, a lawyer for G.R., told the judge that his client’s remorse and sympathies were genuine.
“(G.R.) was a pro-social, non-criminal youth prior to this incident and has been a stable, hard-working young man ever since,” he said. “Further, (G.R.) has expressed remorse for his involvement in this senseless crime and has demonstrated genuine empathy for the victim and his family.”
Mohan said the facts of the case show his client was an “ordinary boy caught up in extraordinary events” and that it was clear that his participation was at the “lower end” of the spectrum.
“There is no indication (G.R.) led this attack, and no one could point to him as a leader or even an aggressor.”
Lawyers for L.Z. and A.D. are expected to give their submissions at a later date. After the judge has made a decision on whether to sentence the accused as youths or adults, he will hear further submissions before imposing sentences.