[ad_1]
Snukal said it’s possible Bonnell made comments to an officer or handler that could impact his credibility as a witness
Article content
The lawyers for four men charged with a Beltline murder want more information on the Crown’s star witness’s participation in a government protection program.
Defence counsel Rebecca Snukal on Thursday argued the Crown has failed to disclose enough information about Darryl Bonnell’s involvement with witness protection.
But the lawyer for the Alberta Witness Security Program argued all information relevant to Bonnell’s credibility and reliability has been disclosed and Justice David Labrenz need not order more material be provided.
Yayhe Gabad, Tyrell Noskiye, Dwayne Turner and Timothy Jones each face a charge of first-degree murder in the Jan. 5, 2020 death of Karson Goodeagle.
Goodeagle, 33, was found by police in medical distress at 11 Ave. and 1 St. S.E. after being stabbed.
The four men were to stand trial beginning Feb. 1, but on that day defence lawyers learned that Bonnell was in the process of entering witness protection.
Article content
The trial was delayed, now scheduled to begin May 25, while Crown prosecutors Scott Wilson and Ken McCaffrey provided disclosure related to the late development, which Justice David Gates, who will hear the trial, called “stunning news.”
But Snukal, who represents Turner and spoke on behalf of herself and lawyers Allan Fay, Adriano Iovinelli, Kim Ross and Jim Lutz, said the prosecution’s disclosure on Bonnell’s involvement in the program was insufficient.
She asked Labrenz to order the AWSP to disclose a threat assessment done, notes from all witness protection officers and handlers who dealt with Bonnell as well as portions of a letter of agreement signed by the witness which the government agency redacted.
Snukal said it’s possible Bonnell made comments to an officer or handler that could impact his credibility as a witness.
AWSP lawyer Hillary Flaherty said the redactions were necessary to protect means and measures the program uses to protect its clientele.
Labrenz will decide next week whether the documents are first-party or third-party records before proceeding further.
If they’re first party they must be disclosed unless privilege can be established.
KMartin@postmedia.com
On Twitter: @KMartinCourts
[ad_2]
Source link
