Proving negligence is key to python case

CAMPBELLTON, N. B. • After more than a week of testimony, the trial of a man whose African rock python escaped and killed two young New Brunswick boys comes down to one question: Did his decision not to cap a ventilation pipe constitute a crime?

Both the Crown and defence presented their closing arguments Tuesday in Campbellton.

The defence said Jean-Claude Savoie didn’t cover a ventilation pipe above his python’s enclosure not because he was careless or reckless, but because he simply didn’t believe the large snake could possibly fit through it.

Savoie pleaded not guilty to criminal negligence causing death after the python escaped the enclosure in his Campbellton apartment and killed four-year-old Noah Barthe and his six-year-old brother Connor in August 2013.

The python travelled through a ventilation duct and dropped into the living room where the boys slept. Savoie’s own son, sleeping in another room, was unharmed.

A number of witnesses said it was common to see the cover of the vent on the enclosure’s floor.

Defence lawyer Leslie Matchim said Tuesday the snake did try to escape about a month or so before the boys were killed, but got stuck partway through the pipe, convincing Savoie and others it could not escape that way.

“They were wrong, but not from a lack of caring,” he said.

Matchim said Savoie didn’t go out and buy the snake. The Canadian Wildlife Service asked him to take it after the snake was seized in Saint John, and Savoie was never given any money to care for the snake in the subsequent 11 years.

Savoie lived in the apartment with his three-year-old son.

“Would he put his own safety and that of his son at risk?” Matchim asked.

The boys had spent Aug. 4, 2013, petting animals and playing at a farm owned by Savoie’s father before a sleepover in Savoie’s apartment. Matchim said the trip showed Savoie was a good father and guardian and was not cavalier with their safety.

Matchim said the issue here is foreseeability.

“Does omission constitute criminal negligence?”

Crown prosecutor Pierre Roussel said Savoie had a legal duty to care for Noah and Connor Barthe when they stayed in his apartment. He was the only adult there.

Roussel said snake experts Bob Johnson and Eugene Bessette both testified the first thing they would do after an attempted escape would be to block the opening.

“Mr. Savoie failed to do that,” Roussel told the jury. “That shows wanton and reckless disregard for the safety of others.”

Roussel said Savoie should have foreseen his failure to take action could result in the snake escaping.

“By failing to take action, that’s when he became negligent,” he said.