Skip to main content
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
Get full digital access to
per week for 24 weeks SAVE OVER $140
A scary good deal on trusted journalism
per week
for 24 weeks
// //

A man accused of murdering a pair of strangers is a “demonstrated liar" who has changed his story throughout his trial, and should not be believed by the B.C. Supreme Court justice deciding his fate, a Crown attorney says.

In closing arguments Tuesday at Rocky Rambo Wei Nam Kam’s murder trial, Daniel Mulligan said Mr. Kam has repeatedly testified he was not aware of the real-world results of his actions in September, 2017, yet made calculated measures to hide evidence by ditching bloody clothes and other items in dumpsters.

The 27-year-old Mr. Kam is charged with the first-degree murders of a Vancouver couple he had not previously met after entering their home, armed with a hatchet, knife and twine, during an evening walk.

Story continues below advertisement

Mr. Kam spotted 64-year-old Dianna Mah-Jones unloading groceries from her car outside her home in Vancouver’s Marpole neighbourhood. He allegedly forced his way into her house and is accused of killing her and her 68-year-old husband Richard Jones.

At the time of the killings, Mr. Kam, a recent economics graduate of the University of Calgary, had moved to Vancouver, settled in a rented room in a house, and adopted a lifestyle focused on playing violent video games and reading comic books.

The trial has revolved around defence arguments that Mr. Kam was in a daze given his intense use of video games when he killed the couple. Indeed, a defence psychologist, Edward Shen, said Mr. Kam was likely in a “gaming consciousness” at the time, although Mr. Shen conceded it was his own term and not a recognized disorder.

Mr. Kam has pleaded not guilty and, in testimony, said he has no idea why he killed the couple. His lawyers have said Mr. Kam believed he was in a video game and could not form the intent to commit first-degree murder.

On Tuesday, defence lawyer Glen Orris called for Justice Laura Gerow to find Mr. Kam guilty of manslaughter. “Any intent formed in fantasy is not a state of mind required for murder," said Mr. Orris.

But Mr. Mulligan dismissed the “gaming consciousness” idea on Tuesday as the trial before Justice Gerow, hearing the case without a jury, entered its final phase.

Mr. Mulligan noted that Mr. Kam never actually testified about being in a gaming consciousness.

Story continues below advertisement

“Very little weight should be attached to the opinion [Mr. Shen] came forward to offer,” said Mr. Mulligan. However, Justice Gerow has previously ruled she will, at least, consider the evidence.

Mr. Kam has repeatedly said he cannot explain why he killed the couple, but Mr. Mulligan said the defendant is simply being evasive about his motives, and that the manner in which he approached the Jones’ house, and moved in to attack requires planning.

He added it’s clear that Mr. Kam was well aware of the real-life consequences of his actions.

“The fact he has not shared a motive does not mean he did not have a motive,” he told Justice Gerow.

We have a weekly Western Canada newsletter written by our B.C. and Alberta bureau chiefs, providing a comprehensive package of the news you need to know about the region and its place in the issues facing Canada. Sign up today.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to
Comments are closed

We have closed comments on this story for legal reasons or for abuse. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies