Crown grills sole defence witness
Man says mother alive hours after ‘ drowning’ Teens won’t testify at bathtub murder trial
The defence has rested its case with two Mississauga teenage sisters accused of murdering their mother deciding not to testify at their trial. Only one defence witness was called during the murder trial — a next- door neighbour who stuck to his story about speaking to the woman the night of her death three hours after crown prosecutors say she was dead in her bathtub having been drowned by her daughters. The 46- year- old man spent yesterday under relentless grilling by Crown prosecutor Brian McGuire, who tried to discredit his claim that the woman asked him for cigarettes and booze about 9 p. m. on Jan. 18, 2003.
According to the man, the brief encounter with an obviously-drunken woman occurred about the same time McGuire and co- Crown Mike Cantlon say her daughters were with friends at a restaurant as part of their pre- arranged alibi, which included a well- rehearsed 911 call when they returned home. The teens, now 19 and 18, have pleaded not guilty to first- degree murder in a case legal experts say is the first in Canada where such young daughters are accused of murdering their mother. The Crown alleges the girls, then 16 and 15, drowned their alcoholic mother at about 6 p. m. that night after getting her drunk and nearly unconscious with Tylenol 3 pills. It’s alleged they then met friends at Jack Astor’s restaurant sometime after 7 p. m. before returning to their home at about 10: 30 p. m. The identities of the teenagers are protected by the Youth Criminal Justice Act, as are the identities of all civilian witnesses and the deceased woman, whose death was initially ruled an accidental drowning due to heavy alcohol consumption. The girls were charged almost a year later after Peel police received information suggesting they had deliberately plotted and carried out their mother’s death.
Justice Bruce Duncan is to decide today in this judge- alone trial whether the Crown can call at least 10 rebuttal witnesses.
Several of them are expected to damage the credibility of the lone defence witness, McGuire told the court. The long- time neighbour yesterday denied doing drugs with the sisters or having any sexual interest in the older girl despite admitting she had talked to him about her sexual experiences.
“I was a sounding board,” he told McGuire when asked if he thought it was appropriate to talk about sex with a young teenage girl.
“ I never smoked anything with those kids — that would be entirely inappropriate . . . that wouldn’t qualify to be a human being,” he told the court. McGuire has asked Duncan to allow him to put several of the girls’ friends back on the stand, including one key Crown witness whom he says will testify that the witness not only “ kissed” the older girl but also provided her with “ free drugs” because he found her “ attractive” and wanted to have a “ sleepover” at his home.
“ If he’s her supplier of drugs, it’s not a stretch to say he tainted or put a spin on his evidence,” McGuire said. During yesterday’s cross-examination, McGuire hammered away at the man’s testimony, getting him to admit he didn’t keep track of specific times on specific days and that he had “ reconstructed events” on the night of the woman’s death because it was “ dark” when he says he spoke to her. The witness didn’t remember several significant events connecting him with the case, including being at the girls’ bail hearing on March 18, 2004 and signing an affidavit in which he agreed to act as a court- appointed supervisor for the teenagers. Although the witness steadfastly stuck to his timeline, he admitted he may have been mistaken about other events, such as when he got home and when he saw the girls entering their home and leaving with police.
“ My times ( about the 9 p. m.) are good, are accurate,” he told McGuire.