Closing arguments heard in Sioux Valley BB gun trial

A defence lawyer argued that the testimony of a man accused of pointing a BB gun at a woman in Sioux Valley Dakota Nation has the “ring of truth,” and he should be found not guilty.

Cyril Elk’s trial began on Jan. 16 and resumed on Thursday in Brandon’s Court of King’s Bench with closing arguments.

Elk, 47, is charged with pointing an imitation firearm and assault with a weapon on a peace officer.

Crown attorney Sarah Kok told the court that the Crown could not prove that the complainant in the matter was enforcing a specific regulation as a First Nation Safety Officer at the time of the allegations.

Because of this, Kok said the Crown would seek a conviction for assault with a weapon rather than assault with a weapon on a peace officer.

Kok said Elk’s evidence was “not worthy of belief.”

She said Helena Mazawasicuna and Christopher Tacan, who were both acting as First Nation Safety Officers in Sioux Valley at the time of the allegations on Jan. 11, 2024, testified that Elk pointed the imitation firearm at them and their vehicle.

“Miss Mazawasicuna indicated specifically that the firearm was pointed toward her,” Kok said.

She said while it was a BB gun and not a real firearm, it looked semi-realistic, and someone standing at a distance, particularly at night when the alleged incident took place, may not be able to tell that it wasn’t a real firearm.

Elk testified that he set an axe and BB gun on his porch railing immediately after opening his door, which Kok said “seems rather unrealistic and unbelievable to the Crown.”

His evidence was “relatively self-serving,” and he asked for the court to rely on an unrelated incident to justify the fact that he came out with weapons in hand, Kok said.

Kok said the court should place little weight on Elk’s explanation that there had been an altercation at his residence months prior and he was afraid those individuals had returned, prompting him to grab the weapons.

“This is obviously not something that the court has any kind of evidence on.”

Kok said that while there was no force utilized, the threat of using a weapon for violence is sufficient and that the Crown has proven Elk’s actions constituted an assault with a weapon.

Defence lawyer Bob Harrison said the bottom line was his client “denied ever making any type of threat or any type of intention to assault anyone.”

He said Elk’s evidence had the “ring of truth,” as there were many details he could have denied but didn’t.

“Look at what he did agree to. He said he came out with a BB gun and an axe. He admits that. He said he was under the influence. He admits that,” Harrison said.

Harrison said the judge should take into consideration Elk’s willingness to agree to these facts when considering the rest of his evidence.

Elk’s evidence on what he did with the BB gun and axe — that he immediately set them down on his porch railing after opening the door — was “pretty clear,” Harrison said.

He said his client was surprised that safety officers showed up, and when he heard their vehicle outside, it caused him to panic.

“He called for medical assistance because his partner was experiencing severe abdominal pain,” he said. “He never called for safety officers to attend.”

Elk admitted he didn’t want the officers there, but Harrison said that shouldn’t be held against him.

“Beyond a reasonable doubt is a high standard, and I don’t think the Crown has proven it.”

» sanderson@brandonsun.com