Trial of pair accused of killing Dartmouth woman over crack cocaine dispute wraps
Crown and defence lawyers have wrapped up their cases in the trial of two people accused of killing a woman in a dispute over a crack cocaine dealing business in Dartmouth, N.S., two years ago.
Nadia Gonzales was stabbed to death in the hallway of a Dartmouth apartment building on Hastings Drive on June 16, 2017.
For the last six weeks, the trial of Calvin Joel Sparks, 26, and Samanda Rose Ritch, 22, has taken place in Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Halifax. The two are both charged with first-degree murder in Gonzales' death and attempted murder in the stabbing of her associate, John Patterson.
The court has heard how Gonzales ran a crack cocaine dealing business, for which she got help from Patterson, Sparks and others. It is not clear that Gonzales and Ritch had any relationship.
The Crown has argued to the jury that Sparks enlisted Ritch's help to kill Gonzales after his business relationship with her soured. In text messages, Gonzales and Sparks both accused each other of being a "rat."
On Wednesday, defence lawyer Malcolm Jeffcock, who represents Sparks, made his closing address to the jury of four women and eight men.
Jeffcock told the jury the Crown's case is built on "tunnel vision," suggesting there are gaps in the Crown's case and that four Crown witnesses have serious credibility problems and lied in their evidence.
"This is the basis for wrongful convictions in this and other provinces," Jeffcock told the jury.
On Tuesday, prosecutor Robert Kennedy outlined the Crown's theory of the case against Sparks and Ritch, which is that Sparks put together a plan to kill Gonzales and enlisted his former girlfriend, Ritch, to assist.
Jeffcock pointed out the presence at the crime scene of three other men who had ties to cocaine dealing and were arrested on the night of the murder. One of those men had been in a relationship with Gonzales previously. Those men were released and were not charged.
Jeffcock suggested an alternate theory that those men could have killed Gonzales and attacked Sparks and Ritch when they "stumbled on the scene" afterward.
Jeffcock also called into question DNA evidence put forward by the Crown. He drew attention to cuts on the hands of Sparks and Ritch. The Crown has suggested those cuts were made accidentally by Sparks as they struggled to stab Gonzales.
Defence focuses on DNA
Sparks' DNA was found in the building, on the zipper of the hockey bag that Gonzales' body was found inside, on Gonzales' sneakers and hoodie, and on a fence in a nearby backyard. DNA from both Sparks and Gonzales was found on a knife in a nearby backyard.
DNA from Ritch was found on Gonzales' fingernails. The DNA of an "unknown male" was also found on Gonzales' fingernails, but Jeffcock said the police and Crown didn't identify that person.
Jeffcock said the hand injuries on Sparks and Ritch were more consistent with defensive wounds on a person trying to defend against or disarm someone else with a knife.
He also suggested to the jury that given the hand wounds, Sparks would have been "bleeding profusely" and that it's not unreasonable that his blood would have been splashed on spots he passed. However, Jeffcock suggested if Sparks stuffed Gonzales into the hockey bag, there would have been more of his client's DNA inside the hockey bag.
Jeffcock told the jury that some of the Crown's witnesses, including John Patterson and the man who lived in the apartment where the stabbing took place, Wayne Bruce, were not credible and could have been lying in a manner that "protects other people" involved in the killing.
Patterson and Bruce admitted to being crack cocaine addicts and drug dealing. Jeffcock said Patterson was "argumentative and combative" on the stand, changed his story from previous police statements, and that Bruce admitted to perjuring himself by lying on the stand.
Justice Christa Brothers began her instructions to the jury Wednesday afternoon and is expected to finish them on Thursday morning. After that, the decision will rest in the hands of the jury.
MORE TOP STORIES
