Court dismisses Cambridge killer’s conviction appeal

Clark Sauve shot his wife twice with an antique pistol while she slept

CAMBRIDGE — Ontario’s highest court has dismissed a Cambridge killer’s appeal of his conviction.

Clark Sauve, a gun collector and owner of a security alarm business, shot his wife, Linda, 63, twice with an antique pistol while she slept in their Rouse Avenue home in Cambridge, before dawn on Dec. 29, 2014.

Now 63, Sauve was convicted in a judge-alone trial of second-degree murder and sentenced last year to life in prison with no chance of parole for 12 years.

Sauve, who uses a wheelchair, argued that Justice Harrison Arrell “materially misapprehended the evidence at trial with the result that he failed to consider” evidence that might clear him, the Ontario Court of Appeal wrote in its ruling dismissing his conviction appeal.

The court agreed Arrell erred when he said there was no video of a police demonstration to see how long it would take a person in a wheelchair to travel to an alarm keypad in the house.

“In fact, contrary to the trial judge’s statement, the police video recording of the demonstration was played in court on the first day of the trial and was entered as an exhibit,” the court said.

But it added “we are not persuaded that the trial judge’s error amounted to a material misapprehension of the evidence.”

It was raised at trial that an alarm went off in Sauve’s house the day of the murder. Evidence could have been interpreted to show the alarm was deactivated by entering a code in a keypad within 32 seconds of it going off.

The video showed a police officer in a wheelchair needing 52 seconds to turn it off. The defence said there was no way Sauve could have done it in 32 seconds, raising the possibility that another person was in the house when his wife was shot.

But the Appeal Court noted the officer did not testify and there was no evidence on how familiar he was with wheelchairs or the alarm system.

“Further, there was uncertainty about whether the alarm could be turned off remotely by a fob.”

And the Appeal Court said the trial judge concluded evidence that Sauve killed his wife was “overwhelming.”

“For example, (he) had gunshot residue on both hands; the gun was faulty and it took both hands to fire it; (his) DNA was found on the gun and on the bullets in the gun; and there was no indication of a robbery or home invasion.”

Sauve claimed two women with Halloween masks, barged into his home, shot his wife in her bedroom, then pistol-whipped him in his bedroom. Sauve had no visible marks on him.