Defence argues teen was under duress from co-accused in Sudbury bar murder

The trial of a teen accused of shooting a Sudbury man to death in April 2023 is wrapping up, with the defence arguing the accused acted under duress.

The defence for a teen on trial for first-degree murder in Sudbury, Ont., is arguing that he was under duress by co-accused Noah Singh when he shot and killed a man in a bar in 2023.

Singh is on the list of Canada’s most wanted criminals.

Closing submissions were made Thursday in the case involving the accused, who was 16 years old when he shot a victim in the back of the head at Overtime Sports Bar and Grill in April 2023.

The young person can’t be identified under the Youth Criminal Justice Act because he was underage at the time of the murder. He is now 19 years old.

He admits to killing Joe Cabigon, 22, who was shot in the back of the head while sitting at the bar inside the establishment.

A temporary publication ban has been lifted on the name of his co-accused, Singh. He is wanted on several offences, including being a party to murder and conspiracy to commit murder.

The teen blames Singh for threatening to harm his family if he didn’t shoot Cabigon.

His charges include murder, weapons possession, possessing a firearm with an altered or defaced serial number, carrying a concealed weapon, unauthorized possession of a weapon, unauthorized possession of a firearm, possession of a firearm with ammunition and conspiracy to murder.

The trial began March 16. Witnesses testified that an altercation took place between two groups of men inside the bar on the night of April 21, 2023. Neither group knew the other.

Staff at the establishment told the one group of men to leave, but a short time later, surveillance video showed the accused returning to the bar and shooting Cabigon in the back of the head while he sat at the bar.

A Sudbury detective testified that police found a discarded satchel with a handgun inside several blocks from the scene.

The young person is seen in the interior surveillance video wearing the satchel and attempting to pull something from it when the shooting happened.

The teen is then seen running from the establishment. He was arrested in Toronto a week after the murder.

Testifying in his own defence earlier this week, the teen said he had an abusive upbringing. He left home in January 2023 to travel with a friend to Thunder Bay to sell drugs.

He arrived in Sudbury in March 2023 with the same friend. That’s when he met Singh.

The youth said Singh befriended him and treated him well at first. However, he testified that the relationship turned abusive when the youth did things that Singh wasn’t happy with.

The night of the shooting, he was at Overtime Sports Bar with Singh and a man identified only as TK. The youth said a pair of men arrived at the bar and Singh recognized one of them as a rapper who was with Cabigon.

The two groups exchanged greetings, but at some point, there was a disagreement, mainly between Singh and Cabigon.

That’s when bar staff told Singh’s group to leave.

Exterior video surveillance played during the trial shows the trio walking down the street to a nearby Tim Horton’s. The teen said that’s when Singh gave him the satchel with the gun inside and told the youth to return to “kill the guy talking sh--t,” referring to Cabigon.

The youth admitted to pulling the trigger, but said he was told to do so by the co-accused. The youth said Singh threatened to harm his family if he didn’t shoot Cabigon.

The defence is arguing that, due to his young age, history of abuse and threats from the co-accused, the teen acted under duress when he pulled the trigger.

Psychological trauma

“This is a very unique case,” defence counsel Kristen Dulysh said in her closing submissions.

Due to the youth’s age, unique life experience, history of abuse and psychological trauma, Dulysh said he acted under duress.

But during her closing submissions, assistant Crown attorney Brittany Butler argued the threshold to prove the defence of duress had not been met.

Butler said there was “overwhelming evidence” that the young person had a safe avenue of escape to avoid committing the murder.

He could have sought help from customers and staff at the bar, he could have contacted someone while he was connected to Wi-Fi, with his cellphone or even while walking back to the bar.

“(The youth) didn’t make attempts,” Butler told the judge during her submissions.

“The accused chose not to avail any avenues of escape.”

On Friday, Justice Susan Stothart will hear submissions on a constitutional challenge from the defence team, which, if successful, would reduce the first-degree murder charge to second degree.

Both charges carry life sentences, but parole eligibility is as early as 10 years for second-degree murder, but is 25 years for first-degree murder.