Man accused in 2011 death to learn verdict in January
A historical murder case involving the disappearance and death of Carol King near Herschel, Sask. did not have sufficient evidence to lay charges — until a Mr. Big sting began two years ago.
Crown prosecutor Matthew Miazga argued Joseph ‘David’ Caissie was being truthful when he told undercover officers — on six occasions in 2016 — that he killed his ex-girlfriend.
Those admissions prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, Miazga told a judge in Saskatoon Court of Queen’s Bench.
Defence lawyer Kevin Hill said Caissie falsely confessed because he wanted to work in the undercover operation’s fictitious gang, arguing the information he gave was unreliable because it didn’t match the physical evidence.
Closing arguments were made Thursday at Caissie’s judge-alone trial. The 55-year-old is charged with the first-degree murder in King ’s death, and with offering an indignity to her remains.
The Crown’s theory is that Caissie abducted King from her yard and killed her on Aug. 6, 2011, because of a deteriorating relationship over financial disputes and King ’s claims that Caissie was stalking her.
She was on her way to make a harassment complaint against Caissie on the day she disappeared. Her remains were found three weeks later on an abandoned farm near Herschel.
Caissie initially told undercover officers he strangled King, before confessing that he actually stabbed her. There is no evidence to support either admission, Hill argued.
The trial heard King’s cause of death is unknown because of the state of her remains when they were found.
Holdback evidence — details only the killer would know — either wasn’t brought up during the Mr. Big sting, or was disputed, Hill said. He told court a heavy jug was found on the gas pedal of King ’s car, but that fact was never publicly released.
Caissie told police he drove the car into the slough.
He made things up because he isn’t the killer, Hill said, arguing that the details his client got right came from police interviews and media reports.
There is also no forensic evidence tying Caissie to the killing, Hill noted.
Caissie repeatedly told police, during the sting, that he was telling them the truth about killing King, Miazga said. He noted that the Crown doesn’t need to prove every detail or even how Caissie killed King — only that he directly or indirectly caused her death.
The fact that Caissie said he planned to kill King and did it while she was confined in her own car satisfies the essential elements of first-degree murder, Miazga argued.
During the initial investigation, Caissie lied when he told police he was working in Olds, Alta. on the day King disappeared, Miazga said.
He then changed his story, saying he drove to Hanna to look for RVS on Aug. 6, 2011. He didn’t divulge the speeding ticket he got just past Hanna — east of where he said he was that day.
Caissie was rushing to Herschel to intercept King before her 5 p.m. RCMP appointment, Miazga argued.
King would have left her house no earlier than 3:45 p.m., Hill said. A photo Caissie took of a storm puts him back in Olds at 9:02 p.m. When police did a test drive from Herschel to Olds, it took them three hours and 40 minutes going 130 km/hr.
That means Caissie would have left around 5:20 p.m., giving him, at most, 90 minutes to abduct King, kill her and drive to three different locations to dump her body, submerge her car and burn his clothes, Hill argued.
“It would take longer than 90 minutes to do all of that,” he said.
Miazga disagreed, arguing it could have been done in an hour.
Justice Richard Danyliuk has reserved his decision until Jan. 4.