\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
![\"JOHN](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/4082950_web1_CP171168175.jpg\")
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
JOHN WOODS \/ FREE PRESS FILES <\/p>\n
The case against a now-23-year-old man accused of killing his mother has been thrown out after a judge ruled he didn\u2019t get a fair trial.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe nightmare is over finally,\u201d one woman said, wiping tears from her eyes. \u201cThis should never have happened.\u201d<\/p>\n
Champagne\u2019s decision, delivered after two stay applications from the defence made in the absence of the jury, focused primarily on the Crown\u2019s cross examination of the accused, saying it was indicative of a \u201cwin at any cost\u201d mentality.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe nightmare is over finally.\u201d<\/p>\n
The man was charged with second-degree murder in the March 26, 2019, killing of his 51-year-old mother.<\/p>\n
The Free Press is not naming the victim as it would identify the accused, who was a teen at the time of the killing. This was the second time the man was on trial for his mother\u2019s murder.<\/p>\n
The victim was found bludgeoned to death in her bedroom at her Southdale home. Prosecutors argued the woman\u2019s son, the only other person who lived in the house, had exclusive opportunity to kill the woman and left the house for 90 minutes that morning to run errands to provide himself with an alibi.<\/p>\n
Defence lawyer James Lockyer said there was no evidence the accused had anything but a loving relationship with his mother. He argued the victim was killed by a co-worker she had accused of sexually harassing her.<\/p>\n
Jurors heard the victim had been off work for an extended time due to an injury and that the accused, who lived with his mother every second week, did much of the grocery shopping, cooking and house cleaning.<\/p>\n
Champagne took over 40 minutes to deliver his decision, excoriating prosecutors and describing various lines of questioning as \u201cspurious,\u201d \u201cbaseless,\u201d \u201cunfounded,\u201d and \u201chighly prejudicial.\u201d<\/p>\n
Unlike at his first trial, the accused testified at his second trial, which began Feb. 9.<\/p>\n
\u201cBy taking the witness box, (the accused) provided the Crown an opportunity to manufacture a motive to kill his mother by suggesting spurious accusations, knowing there was no evidence to support the accusations,\u201d Champagne said.<\/p>\n
During a lengthy cross-examination, prosecutor Adam Bergen asked the accused questions about his mother dying without a will and whether her estate would pass to him as her next living relative.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis was a highly prejudicial series of questions intended to suggest the (the accused) had a financial motive to murder his mother.\u201d<\/p>\n
\u201cThis was a highly prejudicial series of questions intended to suggest the (the accused) had a financial motive to murder his mother,\u201d Champagne said.<\/p>\n
There is no evidence the then-16-year-old accused knew his mother did not have a will, the value of her estate, or whether he stood to inherit it, Champagne said.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis line of questioning was a deliberate and calculated trap for (the accused),\u201d Champagne said. \u201cHe answered the questions honestly and in doing so provided the Crown with circumstantial evidence of a financial motive\u2026 Knowing there was no evidence of a financial motive for (the accused) to murder his mother, the Crown deliberately manufactured evidence of a financial motive, which offends the truth-seeking function of a trial and misleads the jury.\u201d<\/p>\n
The trial heard testimony that on the night before the killing the accused made dinner for his mother and her boyfriend and that they all watched the Jets game on television.<\/p>\n
The accused \u201chad what appeared to be a great relationship with his mother,\u201d the victim\u2019s then-boyfriend Lorne Vandersteen told jurors.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe would basically do things around the house I wish my kids would have done at that age,\u201d he said. \u201cHe would clean the house, he would cook dinner, he would do laundry, most of it without asking, without complaint. \u201cHe was congenial, amicable, easy to get along with, easy to joke with.\u201d<\/p>\n
Prosecutors suggested the accused killed his mother to end her pain, or because he feared he would be saddled as her caregiver.<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t FILE PHOTO<\/p>\n Defence lawyer James Lockyer said this is the first trial outside Ontario he has taken in his nearly 50-year legal career.<\/p>\n \u201cThe Crown takes all the evidence that confirms a strong bond between mother and son and turns it upside down to make unfounded allegations he killed his mother because he did not want to see her suffer any longer,\u201d Champagne said.<\/p>\n \u201cThe suggestion flies in the face of evidence as she was recovering from injury and had planned to return to work the following week,\u201d he said. \u201cThese outrageous allegations are contrary to all of the evidence.\u201d<\/p>\n In another line of questioning, prosecutors elicited testimony about the accused crying as he discussed his concern about his mother with a school counsellor. That exchange was previously deemed privileged and off limits by the first trial judge.<\/p>\n Bergen argued the questioning was fair game because he referred to the staff member the accused spoke to as a teacher, not a counsellor.<\/p>\n Champagne rejected the argument as \u201cdisingenuous.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cThe Crown was fully aware any tears shed at school were in front of a counsellor,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n Champagne said the repeated \u201cmisconduct\u201d of the Crown carried a serious risk of a miscarriage of justice.<\/p>\n \u201cThis has not been a fair trial.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cA final decision from the jury on the merits (of the case) can only be made after a fair trial,\u201d Champagne said. \u201cThis has not been a fair trial\u2026 This is the clearest of cases for a stay of proceedings.\u201d<\/p>\n Lockyer said Champagne\u2019s ruling was \u201ca big relief\u201d for his client.<\/p>\n \u201cThursday is the seventh anniversary of his mother\u2019s death,\u201d Lockyer said. \u201cFinally, he is going to be able to really grieve for her.\u201d<\/p>\n \n\t\tWinnipeg Free Press | Newsletter\n\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t Lockyer, who frequently makes headlines for his work with Innocence Canada, said this is the first trial outside Ontario that he has taken in his nearly 50-year legal career.<\/p>\n \u201cI always believed in the young person\u2019s case, and I did the trial for that reason,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The Crown has 30 days to appeal Champagne\u2019s ruling.<\/p>\n \u201cI hope they won\u2019t,\u201d Lockyer said. \u201cSeven years is long enough for this case to go on, but that remains to be seen.\u201d<\/p>\n dean.pritchard@freepress.mb.ca<\/a><\/p>\n \t\t\t\t Dean Pritchard Dean Pritchard is courts reporter for the Free Press. He has covered the justice system since 1999, working for the Brandon Sun and Winnipeg Sun before joining the Free Press in 2019. Read more about Dean<\/a>.<\/p>\n Every piece of reporting Dean produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print \u2014 part of the Free Press\u2018s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press\u2019s history and mandate<\/a>, and learn how our newsroom operates<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Courts reporter
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n