6
VANCOUVER — The alleged leader of the dramatic kidnapping of the son of a wealthy Vancouver businessman is “just a drug trafficker” whose criminal activities and “nefarious” connections don't prove his guilt in the case, his lawyer said in her final submissions Wednesday.
Anh The Nguyen is among five people on trial for taking Graham McMynn at gunpoint in April of 2006 and holding him captive for eight days.
He was eventually rescued by police in a daring raid at a home in Surrey, B.C.
Mr. Nguyen's lawyer, Karen Bastow, acknowledged that there's a lot of evidence connecting Mr. Nguyen to a dial-a-dope operation and marijuana grow-ops.
But she said that evidence doesn't prove Mr. Nguyen had anything to do with planning or orchestrating the kidnapping.
“He's just a drug trafficker with nefarious connections engaged in nefarious activities,” Ms. Bastow told B.C. Supreme Court Justice Arne Silverman, who is hearing the case without a jury.
Ms. Bastow repeated other defence lawyers' claims that the Crown's case is based on questionable circumstantial evidence that can be explained away.
She offered Mr. Nguyen's involvement in the drug trade to explain much of the evidence presented by the Crown, including efforts to conceal his identity and other suspicious activities.
A collection of cellphones and multiple car rentals would be consistent with someone involved in growing and trafficking marijuana, said Ms. Bastow, and recorded conversations in which Mr. Nguyen ambiguously discussed moving something referred to drugs, not Mr. McMynn.
“The question is not whether Mr. Nguyen is associated with this cast of characters,” she said, referring to the co-accused and others that may have been involved in his drug activities. “It's whether he was a party or principal to the kidnapping of Graham McMynn.”
Ms. Bastow also attempted to cast doubt on other aspects of what she called the “chain of circumstantial evidence” that the Crown alleges proves Mr. Nguyen's involvement.
She pointed to inconsistencies in police surveillance records and Mr. McMynn's own assertion that the voice of the supposed leader matches Mr. Nguyen's, noting that he said the leader had an accent while Mr. Nguyen does not.
She acknowledged that forensic evidence including DNA and fingerprints may link Mr. Nguyen to some of the locations where Mr. McMynn was held, but she argued it doesn't prove he was present when Mr. McMynn was.
Even if Mr. Nguyen was present at the time or otherwise had knowledge of the kidnapping, Ms. Bastow said, “as one might expect with someone like Mr. Nguyen, he did not go to the police.”
And she said that two witnesses that put Mr. Nguyen where Mr. McMynn was held gave inconsistent, unreliable testimony.
Ms. Bastow's submission was one of the final steps in the complex, lengthy trial.
The Crown called nearly 100 witnesses and submitted about 1,100 exhibits. Evidence included DNA taken from the homes where Mr. McMynn was allegedly held, cellphone records, phone taps and reports from a massive police surveillance operation.
Mr. McMynn and his girlfriend were driving to the University of British Columbia on April 4, 2006, when he was forced from the car at gunpoint.
Jacklin Tran, who Mr. McMynn recently married, provided a key lead for police by remembering the licence plate of the kidnapper's rental car.
No ransom demand was ever received, but Mr. McMynn testified that the man he believed was the leader told him another group was paying them $100,000 for the kidnapping and handling negotiations with the family themselves.
The judge is scheduled to deliver his verdict Oct. 17.
