As the first-degree murder trial wraps up in Victoria, we finally hear from the defence and their theory on why they believe their 28-year-old client, Damien Medwedrich, is not guilty of gunning down a known drug dealer back in 2020.
In this trial, there’s really only one witness that matters: Crown’s star witness, whose identity is under a publication ban.
That’s exactly who Medwedrich’s defence lawyer Sarah Runyon took aim at Tuesday, calling him a liar who minimized evidence in attempts to downplay his own participation in what she says was a planned robbery gone wrong.
Most of the trial is based on the testimony of the only other person who was there at the murder scene — a man whose identity is protected by a publication ban. It’s that protected witness’ testimony and evidence, which most of the Crown’s case is based on. But Medwerich’s defence says he shouldn’t be trusted.
In addition to lying, she says the witness minimized evidence, like his relationship with the victim, and feigned a lack of memory to almost every question she posed to him until she referred him back to police statements. All that, she pointed out, despite his mother testifying he has a good memory.
She gave the judge a “Vetrovec warning,” suggesting that witness has a clear interest in the outcome of the trial by trying to absolve himself. As a result, Runyon says the judge should need independent confirmatory evidence to corroborate the protected witness’ testimony. Evidence, she says, doesn’t exist.
“There is a lot more in this room that is missing. This is the breeding ground for a wrongful conviction of first-degree murder,” argued Runyon to Jackson.
With the case based on circumstantial evidence and an unreliable witness, Medwerich’s defence says there’s not enough for the judge to convict on the charge of first-degree. Runyon says the only outcome she sees fit is the much-reduced sentence of manslaughter.
More: https://www.cheknews...liable-1192816/