Defence urges jury to accept Berry's claim that he didn't kill his daughters
Credit to Author: Keith Fraser| Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2019 22:40:16 +0000
A lawyer for an Oak Bay man accused of murdering his two daughters urged a jury on Tuesday to accept the accused’s claims that he is innocent of the crimes.
Kevin McCullough told the B.C. Supreme Court jury that the Crown’s theory of the case against his client, Andrew Berry, was “completely circumstantial” and should not be believed.
“There is no confession of Mr. Berry, no admission of Mr. Berry,” said McCullough. “All Mr. Berry has ever done is say he’s not guilty. And he told you. He gives you a detailed explanation of his innocence. There is no direct evidence of anyone who sees the girls or hears the girls being killed.”
Berry has pleaded not guilty to the Dec. 25, 2017 second-degree murders of Chloe Berry, 6, and Aubrey Berry, 4.
When police arrived at Berry’s Oak Bay apartment, they found the two girls fatally stabbed in their bedrooms. Berry was found naked and injured in his bathtub with what the Crown alleges were self-inflicted injuries.
The Crown theory is that Berry was going through a difficult breakup with his wife, Sarah Cotton, and was under financial pressure when he killed the two girls and tried to kill himself.
Berry testified at trial that he was stabbed in the throat by an unidentified assailant in his apartment and that when he came to, his daughters were dead.
He claimed that he was a problem gambler and owed thousands to a loan shark who had a set of his keys to the apartment.
McCullough, who is expected to take several days to finish his final submissions to the jury, said that the most critical issue at the trial was whether his client had inflicted the injuries on himself.
He told the jury that it may have occurred to them that if the Crown has the burden of proving their case beyond a reasonable doubt and the accused testifies that he didn’t commit murder, it must be that you have to find the accused was a liar in order to convict him.
“The accused was subjected to the most rigorous cross-examination in this trial, and his evidence, whether you like it or not, was internally consistent.”
Pointing to a photo taken of the neck and chest injuries of Berry, McCullough noted that none of the medical experts at trial had concluded that the wounds were self-inflicted.
“If you have a reasonable doubt that Mr. Berry caused his own injuries, then you have a reasonable doubt that he killed the girls because you have a reasonable doubt that someone else stabbed him,” he said.
“That’s why proof beyond a reasonable doubt is so critical on that issue. Not a scintilla of evidence that those injuries were self-inflicted.”
McCullough argued that what is known for certain is that his client was found injured and in the bathtub shortly before 6 p.m. on Christmas Day and that his daughters were dead in the apartment.
“Everything after that is ambiguous, has multiple interpretations, is unreliable, not credible, or is completely consistent with Mr. Berry’s evidence.”
In particular, McCullough attacked the credibility and reliability of a number of Crown witnesses, including an RCMP blood-spatter expert whom he said was inexperienced, incompetent and biased in her testimony.
He called the Crown’s theory about motive “pure speculation” and argued that the evidence from everyone was that his client loved his children and was a doting father.
“Not one time do you hear about Mr. Berry being a bad dad,” he said. “These are all signs the Crown has not proven beyond a reasonable doubt anything, and certainly not Mr. Berry’s guilt.”