Murder case hinges on a hoodie
Defence says clothing, which has DNA on it, does not come close to proving accused shot DJ
Thirty-three-year-old Leonard Pinnock was sitting in his car waiting for a friend who was having his hair braided inside a Toronto barbershop when two gunmen sprayed his vehicle with bullets, killing him.
It had been a spur-of-the-moment trip from Hamilton on April 21, 2017, so no one knew the DJ and father of a young daughter would be in that parking lot at about 9:30 p.m.
That evening, Toronto police brought in the canine unit to follow the scent trail of the fleeing suspects. Within hours, a sniffer dog’s nose led officers to a black Louis Vuitton hoodie lying on a driveway between two homes, about 500 metres from the crime scene, north of Eglinton Avenue West. Located nearby was a handgun, a Glock. Ballistics testing determined it was one of the murder weapons.
Days later, the Centre of Forensic Sciences got a hit. On the inside sleeve of the hoodie was DNA belonging Akil Whyte — at the time under investigation by Toronto police for suspected gang activity.
Investigators, led by homicide Det. Sgt. Jeff Allington, also recovered surveillance video capturing the shocking images of two men crossing the Dufferin Street parking lot and opening fire into Pinnock’s four-door Toyota Corolla. Each man fired six shots. One of the shooters wore what appeared to be a hoodie, and the camera captured part of his face obscured by the raised hood and night lighting.
At the time, police described the attack as “choreographed” and “unprovoked.”
While Allington suspected Whyte was the gunman who discarded both his hoodie and the firearm, he wasn’t ready to make an arrest.
Police were still hunting for the other gunman as well as the driver who deposited the killers near the parking lot.
By September, the homicide squad announced Whyte was wanted in the Pinnock case.
But he was nowhere to be found. A Canadawide warrant was issued and his name and mug shot added to the country’s most-wanted list. The trail ran cold until July 2019 when U.S. marshals picked Whyte up in Atlanta, Ga. Allington flew down and brought Whyte back to Canada to stand trial for first-degree murder.
Early last month, Whyte’s trial finally got underway in person at downtown Toronto’s Superior Courthouse in front of Justice Peter Bawden. He is hearing the case without a jury. During the trial, Whyte, now 29, took the stand — testifying from the jury box because of the pandemic. He admitted being a drug dealer, but denied having anything to do with Pinnock’s death. He also explained he went to Atlanta because of the warm climate and to visit a friend.
During his closing address last week, defence lawyer Anthony Robbins vigorously argued his client’s innocence. Whyte knew neither Pinnock nor his friend, nor did any connection exist between the Hamilton area, where they lived, and Whyte’s neighbourhood — an apparent reference to cases in which victims have been killed not because of who they are but because of where they live.
Robbins described the Crown’s case as largely circumstantial and said, “there is a lot of evidence that is inconsistent with the guilt of Akil Whyte.”
For instance, at the time of the homicide, Whyte knew he was under police surveillance, so it was “absurd” to think that, in that situation, he’d commit a murder. He also dismissed other Crown evidence, such as the shooter’s gait resembling Whyte’s pigeon-toed amble, or that he looks like the shooter whose face was partially captured by the surveillance camera.
While the images shown in court suggested the shooter and Whyte have similar high cheekbones, Robbins said the shooter’s face is fatter and rounder than his client.
But the veteran Toronto defender focused most of his attention on the DNA found on the hoodie. He acknowledge it was “linchpin” evidence in the case, and that without it, the “Crown wouldn’t have a case.”
Robbins isn’t contesting that the DNA belongs to his client.
“His DNA is on that hoodie, one of three other donors,” he said.
Whyte’s DNA was a major contributor to the genetic sample, the other two minor, forensic experts testified during the trial. Nevertheless, Robbins argued the hoodie “does not even come close to proving he is the shooter,” noting that there’s no evidence of Whyte ever owning or wearing such a garment.
One plausible explanation for the existence of his client’s DNA on the hoodie is that the “LV hoodie was not worn by the shooter,” Robbins said.
To prove his point, Robbins replayed video which he said failed to capture the uneven drawstrings dangling from the seized hoodie. This prompted the judge to suggest the strings were perhaps “tucked inside.” The lawyer agreed that was plausible, but also “purely speculative.”
He also urged the judge to take note that there is “zero, not one particle of GSR” (gunshot powder residue) on the hoodie.
Bawden has adjourned the case until mid-January.