Docherty jury to be charged Monday

The prosecution and defence in Kenneth Allan Docherty’s second-degree murder trial are using the same evidence to prove their cases.

Crown Prosecutor Jane Rodger concluded her evidence Tuesday and her closing arguments Wednesday afternoon. Defence lawyer Carrie- Anne Bellan, who called no evidence, was expected to argue for an acquittal on grounds of self defence, beginning at 10 a.m. today, and Superior Court Justice Bonnie Wein is instruct the jury on Monday.

In her closing submissions to the jury, Ms. Rodger spent about an hour arguing that there were inconsistencies in Mr. Docherty’s statements to police that rendered them unreliable, and she contended there was no evidence to support any legal defence to the charge of second-degree murder.

Describing Mr. Docherty as “a bluffer,” she said there was no reason for him to have felt threatened in any way by Tyson Weber, whom she described as a non-violent person who would have had a six-inch, 100-pound disadvantage in a physical confrontation.

She said Mr. Weber was actually a “lightweight loan shark” whose partner, Dan Puchta, was a heavier person and suggested Mr. Puchta might have been thought of as threatening, but there had been no indication of violence in either of two other loan transactions that she reviewed for the jury.

The evidence, she said, showed that in May 2008 Mr. Docherty invited both men to come to Orangeville for breakfast and to collect some money he owed, and which apparently they were collecting for Ed Mercer.

But Mr. Docherty would have known there was no money, she said, as he had faked a deposit to the TD bank.

Mr. Weber had made no attempt to cloak the fact that he was at the Docherty home, she said, so it would be unreasonable to infer he had come to kill him.

On the other hand, Ms. Rodger said Mr. Docherty intended to kill Mr. Weber to get rid of a debt. She speculated that Mr. Docherty had grabbed a kitchen knife with that intent as he followed Mr. Weber to the garage and might have struck the initial blow to the back of the head before stabbing him in the neck area seven times.

Ms. Rodger described the ensuing hours as callous, and Mr. Docherty’s movements as efforts to arrange disposal of both the body and the truck Mr. Weber had driven to Orangeville on the fateful morning.

In the absence of a directed verdict, the eightwoman, four-man jury will have three choices available: finding Mr. Docherty guilty as charged, acquitting him, or returning a verdict of manslaughter on finding that the stabbing was an act of manslaughter.

The Criminal Code provides sanctions for all homicides except where the killer acts in selfdefence. A conviction for second-degree murder carries an automatic life sentence, with judges left to set a minimum period of parole ineligibility of between 10 and 25 years. There is no minimum sentence for manslaughter, for which the maximum is a life sentence involving seven years of parole ineligibility.

The charge to the jury Monday is likely to include an explanation of the differences between murder and manslaughter, as well as when a homicide might be non-culpable.

The evidence before the jury includes the undisputed fact that Mr. Docherty stabbed Mr. Weber. It has also included the fact that Mr. Weber was part of a group pressing Mr. Docherty for money.

Orangeville courts have dealt with more than a half-dozen homicide trials and preliminary hearings over the past 20 years.

Of those, one was found to have been selfdefence, in which the accused feared he was in imminent danger of death or grievous bodily injury, and one other was ruled not criminally responsible for the act because of mental illness.

The self-defence case, defended by Orangeville lawyer Lorna Paradis, involved the death of Willard Tait of East Luther Township of a gunshot wound to the head from a rifle held by Ib Hansen at the front door of his East Luther home.

The Docherty trial is the second one at Orangeville presided over by Justice Wein in recent years. The previous case involved the death of a kick-boxer at Cheltenham by shotgun wounds from an aircraft mechanic who lived in Downsview.

In that trial, the jury found the accused guilty of manslaughter. Justice Wein, however, imposed what was considered a severe penalty.

Manslaughter verdicts usually reflect a finding that the Crown had failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused intended to kill rather than merely injure.