3

B.C. judge tosses terror trial verdict, rules RCMP entrapped pair

‘The world has enough terrorists,’ judge says, calling John Nuttall and Amanda Korody ‘foot soldiers’ in RCMP campaign


 

cp canadian press logo

VANCOUVER — Two people found guilty of terror charges will walk free after a British Columbia Supreme Court judge ruled they were entrapped by the RCMP in a police-manufactured crime.

Justice Catherine Bruce said police instigated and skillfully engineered the very terrorist acts committed by John Nuttall and Amanda Korody, who believed they were planting pressure-cooker bombs that would blow up at the legislature on Canada Day in 2013.

“The world has enough terrorists. We do not need the police to create more out of marginalized people,” Bruce said in a landmark ruling Friday.

“The defendants were the foot soldiers but the undercover officer was the leader of the group,” she said.

“Without the police it would have been impossible for the defendants to carry out the pressure-cooker plan.”

Bruce said RCMP officers overstepped their authority during a months-long, undercover sting and their actions were egregious.

“The police decided they had to aggressively engineer and plan for Nuttall and Korody and make them think it was their own,” she said.

“To say they were unsophisticated is generous,” she said, adding there was no imminent threat to the public from a pair who demonstrated they were not intelligent but naive.

A jury found Nuttall and Korody guilty in June 2015 of three terrorism-related charges, but Bruce delayed registering the convictions at the request of defence lawyers, who wanted to argue the Mounties had entrapped their clients.

An entrapment finding means Bruce will issue a stay of proceedings, which throws out the jury’s guilty verdict.

It won’t appear on any criminal record and can’t be used against the couple in the future. Had they been convicted, Nuttall and Korody would have a maximum sentence of life in prison.

A stay of proceedings has the same end result but is different than an acquittal, which is a finding of not guilty.

This is the first time in Canada the legal defence of entrapment has been successfully argued in a terrorism case. Three previous attempts failed.

 


 

Comments are closed.