Closing arguments in fatal crash trial

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 26/08/2023 (1110 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

A judge must decide whether there is any reasonable doubt that the man charged after a fatal car crash nearly four years ago was behind the wheel during the crash, a courtroom heard Friday morning.

The Crown and defence delivered closing arguments on the final day of the King’s Bench trial of Paul Elwood Houle, who has pleaded not guilty to two counts of dangerous operation causing death, one count of dangerous operation causing bodily harm as well as driving while prohibited.

The trial, which began on Tuesday, was the result of a collision that occurred on Dec. 4, 2019, a few kilometers east of Waywayseecappo. Kimberly Sutherland, 45, and her nephew, 31-year-old Kyle Brandon, were killed and Anthony Sutherland, 50, who testified on Tuesday, was injured in the crash.

The truck lost control on Road 144 West (also known as Birdtail Road) and slid into a ditch before colliding with two trees. The truck then rolled over before finally landing on its roof.

During closing arguments, both the Crown and defence agreed that the case hinged on the identity of the driver.

Crown attorney Jeannelle Allard urged the judge to find Houle guilty, arguing that the only possible conclusion was that Houle had been the driver at the time of the crash.

Allard summarized the evidence that prosecutors presented during the multi-day trial, which she argued proved Houle was in the driver’s seat and that his driving that night met the criteria for dangerous operation.

Evidence from Crown witness testimony showed that Houle and the three other occupants of the truck had been drinking that night, they all weren’t wearing seatbelts, and the truck was speeding — 123 kilometers per hour on a road with a 90 km/h speed limit — Allard said.

The driver never hit the brakes during the crash, and the collision was extreme — the truck hit two trees with enough force to break them and the rollover was so severe that the roof of the truck was crushed until it nearly touched the steering wheel.

“If you accept that Paul was the driver, there was not one decision made on his part that was safe in any way, or be representative of a reasonably prudent driver,” Allard told the court.

Allard said that the Crown had presented two videos from that night, one showing Houle getting in and out of the driver’s seat, and the other in which, a gas station manager testified she identified Houle as the driver. Other Crown witnesses, like a fire chief, and the son of the only other survivor of the crash, placed Houle as the driver.

Finally, there were the blood stains on the back and front of the driver’s airbag which came back as a match for Houle. Allard argued that there were other blood stains on the airbag, the blood stains on the back of the bag, could only have come from the driver holding on to the steering wheel, witness testimony revealed.

Houle’s defence lawyer, Greg Sacks, told the court he agreed with the Crown that the case rests upon the very narrow issue of who the driver was at the time of the crash.

He argued that even though his client’s DNA was found on the driver’s airbag, he said that witnesses also testified that the blood could have gotten on the airbag other ways than direct contact with the airbag.

“It really comes down to whether or not the court finds that that DNA that they found there was enough to find without a reasonable doubt that Houle was driving,” Sacks said. “And I submit to the court, respectfully, that it is not.”

Sacks also said that one witness testified to the extreme damage to the driver’s seat sustained in the crash, which the defence lawyer argued wasn’t consistent with the minor injuries that Houle received.

He said that a witness who placed Houle in the driver’s seat did so at a significant time before the crash, meaning that there was the possibility that the four changed positions in the truck at some point.

Sacks also said the police investigation into the level of alcohol consumption by Houle that night was lacking and argued there was nothing definitive about exactly what happened at the time of the crash or why the truck left the road.

Ultimately, Justice Elliott Leven decided to reserve his decision and deliver it at a later date.

The matter will next appear in King’s Bench court on Oct. 10.

» gmortfield@brandonsun.com

» X: @geena_mortfield