The Bizarre Case Of The Kingston Honour Killing

[darklord700]

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...brupt-whimper/

I've been following this trial closely and one thing I never understood and the Crown wisely avoided mentioning is that how did the victim die or get killed.

In all likelihood the four victims, 3 fully grown women and one teenage girl were all dead or at least subdued by the 3 accused before the car plunged into the river.

Of the 3 accused, the father is 52 and the son is about 18 both are physically fit but hardly strong. I find it hard to believe both of them could subdue or kill the four victims in a relatively short time frame of 30 minutes.

I initially thought the four victims must had been drugged but autopsy turned up nothing. Could it be that there was hitman involved?

[burn_this_city]

I'll be shocked if they aren't all found guilty. The girls may have been knocked unconcious before they were driven into the water. The whole case sickens me, their father is a psychopath and the mother is a liar. I hope none of the three ever see the outside of prison.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by darklord700

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/...brupt-whimper/

I've been following this trial closely and one thing I never understood and the Crown wisely avoided mentioning is that how did the victim die or get killed.

In all likelihood the four victims, 3 fully grown women and one teenage girl were all dead or at least subdued by the 3 accused before the car plunged into the river.

Of the 3 accused, the father is 52 and the son is about 18 both are physically fit but hardly strong. I find it hard to believe both of them could subdue or kill the four victims in a relatively short time frame of 30 minutes.

I initially thought the four victims must had been drugged but autopsy turned up nothing. Could it be that there was hitman involved?

I doubt that there was anyone else involved, they killed 4 woman who for the most part had been raised to be subserviant.

The father is not a psycho I'm hoping they find him to be completely rational, there's no doub the wife is a lying scumbag.

But at least they'll be able to observe their twisted version of their religion from a 4x6 cell for the rest of their lives.

[darklord700]

From what I read, the dad and the son are done. The mom, I'm afraid, might have a sliver of a chance of getting acquitted. The worse thing the mom did was lying to the police time and time again. But the Crown didn't present any major evidence against her. It's fair to say the mom was at least an accomplice that didn't stop the murders from happening. But is being an accomplice as guilty as a murderer in a 1st degree case?

[MarchHare]

I wish the media and everyone else discussing this case would stop using the phrase "honour killing" and start calling it what it is: cold-blooded murder.

[North East Goon]

I am not up to date on this trial. Why did the father and brother have so much hate towards there daughters/sisters?

[CaptainCrunch]

Because they dressed Western style and the oldest dated and then secretly married a boy that the father didn't approve of.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

I am not up to date on this trial. Why did the father and brother have so much hate towards there daughters/sisters?

The usual nonsense, an obsession with controlling the female family members sexuality. It's the common thread in all these cases. The girls were wearing revealing clothes at school and started dating boys. They also killed the father's first wife because she supported the girls and wanted a divorce.

[North East Goon]

Beautiful girl's all 3 of them - what a tragic story!

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by North East Goon

I am not up to date on this trial. Why did the father and brother have so much hate towards there daughters/sisters?

The youngest girl got sent home from school because she wore revealing clothing.

One older girl took some pictures of herself in bikini which the dad said were "naked" pictures.

The oldest girl took on a secret boyfriend.

The infertile first wife was abused by the family and it is reasonable to believe that the mom who's standing trial (the second wife) would like her dead.

I don't think the son really hated the girls but he was tame as lamb and would basically do whatever his dad told him to do.

[chemgear]

sums up the whole thing for me.

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

I wish the media and everyone else discussing this case would stop using the phrase "honour killing" and start calling it what it is: cold-blooded murder.

Since its reasonably common in the culture where they have origins/routes and that is the name used there, I don't think we should avoid the use of the term "honour killings."

The persistent use of the term in this trial exposes it for what it really is, cold blooded murder, and pressures adherents to these ancient but stunningly immature societies to progress further towards the 21st century.

Particularly if they choose to live in this very 21st century Society.

Cowperson

[Ozy_Flame]

I've got a feeling that if the wife gets off from this case, she's going to get psychologically lynched by the rest of the muslim community. If I were her and by some miracle didn't go to jail I'd pack up and move to a rural farm with no one around the rest of my life.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

I've got a feeling that if the wife gets off from this case

For those not following the case, the wife, Tooba, knew about everything and chose not to tell a soul. But that in itself is probably not enough to convict her of 1st degree murder.

The key factor is if the jury believe or not that Tooba was the one driving the death car to the river to be rammed by the son into the river with the Lexus.

Tooba actually did confess once that she was the one driving the death car during interrogation but later recanted her confession in court saying it was coerced by the police.

[valo403]

I haven't followed this case at all so perhaps someone can fill me in on what the evidence is of the involvement of the accused, nothing in the article posted really ties them to the crime but there's obviously more to the story. If it's based wholly off a recanted admission and the testimony of a self appointed private investigator I wouldn't be so confident in a guilty verdict.

[burn_this_city]

The biggest peices of evidence in my mind is the damage to the front of the family SUV and the taillight of the car in the water. The wiretaps are also pretty damning.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by valo403

I haven't followed this case at all so perhaps someone can fill me in on what the evidence is of the involvement of the accused,

1. Damage to the rear bumper on the death car matches the damage to the front end of the Lexus, broken pieces of the Lexus headlight found at the scene prove that the death car was rammed by the Lexus before falling into the river. The son admitted to ramming the death car with the Lexus "by mistake".

2. The police testified that all the bodies when first found in the river inside the car lied in a wired way, that they were on top of each other. The police cannot identify who's driving the car and there was no sign of trying to escape by the victims even though one front passenger window is fully down. Strong evident that the four victims were either dead or incapacitated when the death car plunges into the water.

3. The son after ramming the death car into the river, watching 4 of his family members drown, didn't call 911 or even tell their parents but drove back to Montreal because he had some urgent business to take care of. What the son did in Montreal was staging a fake car accident to mask the damage to the front end of the Lexus.

4. This one is funny. The Dad admitted to being at the crime scene watching the death car plunging into the river on June 30, 2009 2AM. The very next morning, not 12 hours after knowing that 4 people were dead, the Dad was trying to get a deal on a motel room.

5. Earlier on the Jun 30, 2009 evening, just a few hours before the killing happened, a motel manager asked the son and dad rooms for how many people, they answered for 6 people.

Let's see, 7 children, 2 wives and the dad, the clan had 10 people at the beginning of the trip. But the dad and son knew there'll only be 6 left at the end of the evening before 4 of them were dead.

Many times the 3 accused admitted to being at the crime scene, knowing about what happened, only later to recant their statements at the trial, they are just too numerous to list. It'll be up to the jury what version of the truth to believe in.

[valo403]

Originally Posted by darklord700

1. Damage to the rear bumper on the death car matches the damage to the front end of the Lexus, broken pieces of the Lexus headlight found at the scene prove that the death car was rammed by the Lexus before falling into the river. The son admitted to ramming the death car with the Lexus "by mistake".

2. The police testified that all the bodies when first found in the river inside the car lied in a wired way, that they were on top of each other. The police cannot identify who's driving the car and there was no sign of trying to escape by the victims even though one front passenger window is fully down. Strong evident that the four victims were either dead or incapacitated when the death car plunges into the water.

3. The son after ramming the death car into the river, watching 4 of his family members drown, didn't call 911 or even tell their parents but drove back to Montreal because he had some urgent business to take care of. What the son did in Montreal was staging a fake car accident to mask the damage to the front end of the Lexus.

4. This one is funny. The Dad admitted to being at the crime scene watching the death car plunging into the river on June 30, 2009 2AM. The very next morning, not 12 hours after knowing that 4 people were dead, the Dad was trying to get a deal on a motel room.

5. Earlier on the Jun 30, 2009 evening, just a few hours before the killing happened, a motel manager asked the son and dad rooms for how many people, they answered for 6 people.

Let's see, 7 children, 2 wives and the dad, the clan had 10 people at the beginning of the trip. But the dad and son knew there'll only be 6 left at the end of the evening before 4 of them were dead.

Many times the 3 accused admitted to being at the crime scene, knowing about what happened, only later to recant their statements at the trial, they are just too numerous to list. It'll be up to the jury what version of the truth to believe in.

The damage argument doesn't fly for me, at least not for first degree murder, the possibility of an accident followed by panic is strong enough to keep me from getting beyond a reasonable doubt. Now the addition of the potential incapacity would be big, but unless you didn't include it (and it's obviously unfair of me to expect you to give me a detailed list of the evidence) there seems to be a theory there but no actual concrete evidence to tie it together.

The rest of the evidence is all quite circumstantial, and I don't put a lot of faith in recanted statements. I think they likely did it, but I don't know that I'd be overly confident in a guilty verdict without something that makes it more certain that this wasn't an accident followed by bizarre behavior due to the trauma. It just seems that there's enough there for a jury to grab onto in terms of reasonable doubt.

[Hilch]

This happened in Canada, no way any of them are in jail more than 5 years.

[darklord700]

Originally Posted by valo403

The damage argument doesn't fly for me, at least not for first degree murder, the possibility of an accident followed by panic is strong enough to keep me from getting beyond a reasonable doubt.

The weakest part of the Crown's case is that they couldn't say how the victims died except that they drowned. The judge actually told the jury at the beginning of the trial that circumstantial evidence and direct evidence weight the same in our judicial system. So I agree that the Crown built their case on a lot of circumstantial evidence. But if the jury abide by, and they should, the judge's direction at the beginning of the trial, these circumstantial evidence is actually quite powerful.

At the end, the jury will have to decide if the defense story of a joy ride gone wrong at 2 am with 4 people, coupled with the accidental ramming by the son was actually an accident or a premeditated murder.