Defence in standoff trial plans to dispute whether seized guns are firearms

A wrinkle developed on Monday at the trial for a man accused of shooting at police, when court heard that an argument is expected over whether two guns can technically be defined as firearms.

The trial for Lyall Marlin Anaquod, 43, began a year ago — almost to the day — with a number of Crown witnesses, then had to adjourn when a key witness failed to attend court. That witness having been located and called to testify, the matter later required another adjournment when Anaquod fired his lawyer prior to closing arguments.

The case was back before the court on Monday for what was anticipated to be closing arguments, as Anaquod and his new defence lawyer were not expecting to call any evidence.

But a further — and significant — hiccup occurred when court learned defence lawyer Adam Fritzler advised Crown prosecutor Chris White his client isn’t acknowledging two shotguns seized from an Elphinstone Street house in October 2017 are, for legal purposes, firearms.

The case revolves around a lengthy and tense standoff from Oct. 23, 2017, in which police say they were shot at by someone barricaded inside the house.

One police officer testified to having been temporarily trapped in front of the house while another — a member of the SWAT team — told the court he fired a round at someone in the house after other members were shot at. Another police officer testified to having a bullet whiz past him as he stood near the house.

The standoff lasted some 10 hours before efforts by SWAT and other units finally drove two people — including Anaquod — from the house.

Fritzler told Judge Dennis Fenwick one of his arguments will be whether the Crown has successfully proven the identity of the shooter. The other person in the house that day — alleged to be the victim of a confinement by Anaquod — proved a tight-lipped witness for the Crown when she testified in September. She provided more description in a videotaped interview with police, telling them Anaquod threatened he would shoot police.

Court heard a number of firearms were seized from the scene: two shotguns and a rifle. As is usual, a report was prepared by police for court proceedings, identifying the guns as firearms — a report that, until Monday, was not in issue.

Fritzler said he now intends to argue two of the guns were jammed and inoperable — meaning they would not legally qualify as firearms for the purposes of court proceedings.

“Frankly, I would be doing my client an injustice to make that admission at this stage,” he said.

Anaquod takes no issue with the rifle.

White took exception to the would-be defence argument, expressing concern this issue is only being raised now, potentially prejudicing the Crown’s case.

“There’s a domino effect here,” he said, explaining there might not just be an effect to the firearms possession charges, but also to charges of confinement and pointing a firearm.

White asked for and received an adjournment, allowing him to call further evidence as a way to try to prove the shotguns are indeed firearms as defined by law.